2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
SHER KHAN and others Versus Messrs UNITED BANK LIMITED and others
| Citation | 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Justice (R) Amanullah Abbasi, Chairman and Nazar Muhammad Shaikh, Member |
| Parties | SHER KHAN and others Versus Messrs UNITED BANK LIMITED and others |
| Primary Law | Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Justice (R) Amanullah Abbasi, Chairman and Nazar Muhammad Shaikh, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SHER KHAN and others Versus Messrs UNITED BANK LIMITED and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Samdani for Appellants (in Appeals Nos.154(K) of 1998 and 155(K) of 1999).
- Faisal Ghani for Respondents (in Appeal No.154(K) of 1998).
- Abdullah Junior of Ch. Jamil for Respondents (in Appeals Nos.155(K) of 1998 and 483(K)(C.E.) of 2000).
- Date of hearing: 8th April, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 2-A & 4
Privatization Commission Ordinance, (LII of 2000), Ss.28, 31, 42
Before appeal could come up for regular hearing, Bank had been privatized through a Notification
After said privatization, Service Tribunal had lost its jurisdiction and in the light of provisions of Ss.28 and 31 of Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000, all pending cases would come within the ambit of jurisdiction of High Court
Section 42 of Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000 also had provided that provisions of said Ordinance would have overriding effect all other laws
Appeal, to Service Tribunal in circumstances stood abated. Appellant in person (in Appeal No.483(K)(C.E.) of 2000).
Judgment & Decree
NAZAR MUHAMMAD SHAIKH (MEMBER).
These appeals contain identical question of law and are, therefore, being disposed of by this single Judgment.
2. Appellant Sher Khan has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act of 1973 to assail the respondent's order dated 24-11-1997. Appellant filed departmental appeal on 08-1-1998 which was rejected by the respondents vide letter dated 9-2-1998.
3. Before the case could come up for regular hearing the respondents-Organization i.e. United Bank Limited (U.B.L) has been privatized w.e.f. 19-10-1992 vide Government of Pakistan's notification dated 18-10-2002.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents stated that in view of the privatization of the respondents-Organization, the FST has ceased to have jurisdiction in terms of section 2-A of the Service Tribunals Act of 1973. He also referred to the rulings of this Tribunal in Appeal No.898(K)(CE) of 2002 (S. Iqbal Hussain v. U.B.L.), 693(K) of 1997 (Waseem and others v. U.B.L.), 824(L) of 1998 (M. Yousaf Qureshi and others v. U.B.L.) wherein similar view was taken. The learned counsel for the respondents has also cited the judgment of the apex Court in C.Ps.Nos.2767-L, 3030-L of 2000 and 157-L of 2001 where their Lordships recognized that with the privatization of the Muslim Commercial Bank the FST's jurisdiction was ousted.
5. It has been now conclusively held that after the Privatization of the United Bank Limited, FST has lost its jurisdiction and in the light of provisions of sections 28 and 31 of the Privatization Commission Ordinance of 2000 all the pending cases shall now come within the ambit of the jurisdiction of the Honourable High Court. Section 42 of the said Ordinance also provides that the provisions of Privatization Ordinance shall have effect of overriding all other laws.
6. In view of the above facts the appeals stand abated, appellants may agitate their grievances before the proper legal forum. These appeals are, therefore, disposed of accordingly.
7. This judgment shall apply mutatis mutandis to the Appeals Nos.155(K) of 1999 and 483(K)(CE) of 2000.
8. No orders as to costs. Parties be informed accordingly. H.B.T.82/FST Appeal stood abated.