2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--‑Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 28‑11‑1997 of the Federal Service Tribunal through which the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of, termination of his services, dated 5‑2‑1990 has been dismissed on the ground that section 2‑A added through Act No. XVII of 1997 in the Service Tribunals Act declaring employees of statutory corporations as civil servants for purposes of the said Act was not retrospective in its operation.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Lift Operator in Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited in April, 1989. His services were terminated by order, dated 5‑2‑1990. He challenged the said order under section 25‑A of the I.R.O., 1969. During the pendency of the said petition, section 2‑A was added through amending Act No. XVII of 1997 in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 through which it was provided that any employee of Statutory Corporation or authority etc. under 'the control of the Federal Government would be deemed to be a civil servant for the purposes of the said Act. The petitioner filed appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal being an employee of respondent‑company, which was under the control of Federal Government, as such, was within the ambit of section 2‑A of the Act. The appeal has been dismissed by the said Tribunal on the ground that the said amendment was not retrospective in operation and the order passed before coming into force of the said amending Act, 1997 and the proceedings already pending against the order passed before that in any Court remained unaffected and could be continued as such, Service Tribunal was not vested with any jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in this matter.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment reported as Syed Aftab Ahmad and others v. K.E.S.C. and others (1999 SCMR 197) in which this Court has held that section 2‑A was retrospective in its operation being a law relating to procedure, as such, all the proceedings pending before any forum other than the. Federal Service tribunal in respect of departmental order made before insertion of the said section could no longer continue and the only remedy was to approach the Service Tribunal. Learned counsel for the respondents frankly conceded that, the appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal was maintainable in view of the law declared by this Court and the view taken by the Service Tribunal was not correct which had resulted in refusal to exercise powers vested in it under the law to entertain the appeal and decide the same on merits and he has no objection if the impugned judgment of .the Tribunal is set aside and it be directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner of merits.

4. The Office has reported that this petition is barred by one day Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to condone delay order to do complete justice. Delay of one day in filing this petition is, therefore, condoned.

5. With consent, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is accepted. The impugned judgment, dated 28‑11‑1997 of the Service Tribunal is set aside and the case is remanded to the said Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits. There will be, however, no order as to costs. M.B.A./G‑1/S Order accordingly.