2024 PLP 179 (PLC)

SHAHID MEHMOOD KHOKHAR, CHAIRMAN.

Instant contempt petition is directed against Rameeza Majeed Nizami, Managing Director, NIPCO (Pvt.), Lahore for non-compliance of order dated 30/07/2019 and 18/12/2019 with the contention, trial during service, petitioner filed petition before this Tribunal for recovery of arrears / benefits accrued under the 7th Wage Board Award and along with main petition, also prayed for interim relief in shape of status quo order qua his services as he apprehended that after filing of petition, management may become revengeful and take an adverse action. On the said application, the then Chairman of this Tribunal directed the respondent not to pass any adverse order against the petitioner. Thereafter, in violation of order dated 30/10/2018, respondent terminated services of the petitioner on 17/11/2018 without assigning any reason. When confronted, authorized representative of the petitioner could not produce the above said termination order but conceded that services of the petitioner were terminated in view of office order dated 17/11/2018. Admittedly, petitioner did not challenge his alleged illegal termination before the competent forum, rather filed a contempt application before this Tribunal and the then Chairman, ITNE, vide order dated 18/12/2018, passed the following order:- "

5. The Managing Director, NIPCO, Lahore is directed to reinstate the petitioner as he was on 16/11/2018 or pay all his outstanding dues as he claimed under the 7th Wage Board Award along with terminal benefits i.e. provident fund and gratuity at once. Till payment of final dues, monthly salary of the petitioner shall be paid regularly. In case of failure, the Managing Director, NIPCO, Lahore will appear in person. Copy of this order be communicated to the parties immediately." But the respondent did not implement the above said order and consequently, petitioner approached this Tribunal again and on 30/07/2019, the then presiding Officer of this Tribunal passed the following order: Therefore, I am of the opinion that as respondent has neither restored the petitioner nor paid them their full outstanding dues and not paying the monthly salary as well, which they were bound to pay according to the order of this Tribunal. The respondent has also not challenged the order passed by my learned predecessor so it attained finality. So I hereby endorse the same and monthly salary will keep adding in the arrears already determined till the payment of final dues. With this observation, the case in hand is disposed of, however, the petitioner has the right to invoke jurisdiction of competent forum for redressal of his grievance qua alleged illegal termination. Copy of this order be placed in the main file.

2. But even then, above said order dated 30/07/2019 was not implemented by the respondent management, therefore, the petitioner filed instant application on 17/02/2021 with the following prayer:-

3. Learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the instant, application as having no cause of action and submitted that in the main case No IT/P/1653/18/C, titled Abid Hussain Jadoon v. Daily Nawa-e-Waqt, Islamabad judgment was passed on 09/12/2020 and thereafter, petitioner filed an Execution Petition No. IT/P/2295/21/C which was pending adjudication before this Tribunal and today petitioner has been paid entire amount of Rs. 808704/-, awarded under the above said judgment and the said Execution Petition No. IT/P/2295/21/C has been disposed of having borne fruit and the authorized representative of the respondent has put his signatures on the margins of the order sheet as an endorsement, therefore, prayed for dismissal of this petition / application having no merits.

4. Arguments heard, record perused. It is an admitted position between the parties that petitioner filed a petition for the benefits accrued under the 7th Wage Board Award and admittedly his services were terminated on 17/11/2018, which were never challenged before any competent forum but instead of filing a grievance petition before the appropriate forum, petitioner succeeded in obtaining the above said order dated 16/10/2018 and 30/07/2019 from this Tribunal through contempt petition but the above said orders were never implemented by the management. Whereas, the then Chairman passed the judgment dated 09/12/2020 in the main case No. IT/P/1653/18/C, titled Abid Hussain Jadoon v. Daily Nawa-e-Waqt, Islamabad and subsequently petitioner filed execution petition No. IT/P/2295/21/C for recovery of decretal amount of Rs. 808,704/-, which remained pending due to non-payment by respondent. Relying upon the judgment passed by the August Supreme Court in C.A No. 908 of 2015, titled Muhammad Naeem Khan and another v. Muqadas Khan and others reported as PLD 2022 SC 99 wherein it was held that:- "Evolution of law with changing times -- Law must not become stagnant or archaic while society moves forward; it must be accessible, intelligible and must change with the times responding to the realism of modern day life which requires transfiguration of new ways and means and invention of up to date mechanisms for the purpose of providing access to justice with the aim to cut down the volume of litigation and pendency of cases".

5. This Tribunal issued a direction in case titled APNS v. Federation of Pakistan and others to PID. Islamabad as well as DGPR, Government of Punjab rot to issue any amount of respondent management on account of advertisement released by the departments and submit original cheque in the name of "Implementation Tribunal for Newspaper Employees", so that on receipt of the same, amount could be paid to the litigants / decree holders. Accordingly this Tribunal paid Rs.808,704/- for satisfaction of judgment dated 09/12/2020 and the above said execution petition is disposed of today having borne fruit.

6. As far as, order dated 30/10/2018 and 18/12/2019 are concerned, I am not inclined to agree with the contention of authorized representative that this Tribunal has validly issued the above said orders as I am of the considered view that the matter of contempt of Court is always between the Court and the contemnor and if it is proved that order of the Court has been violated, then contemnor as to face the consequences but no Court could reinstate the petitioner in contempt proceedings. Similarly the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in its latest judgment passed in Suo Motu Case No. 1 of 2022 reported as PLD 2022 SC 574 has held that "Court decide disputes on the strength of established facts and not on surmises or mere conjectures". Therefore, relying upon the above cited judgment of apex Court, instant application being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. MQ/7/ITNE Petition dismissed.