1998 PLP 483 (SCMR)
GHULAM ABBAS and 23 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 483 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri and Munir A. Sheikh, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM ABBAS and 23 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 483 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 483 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri and Munir A. Sheikh, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 483 (SCMR) (GHULAM ABBAS and 23 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- K.M.A. Samdani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mehr Khan Malik, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in all Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 18th December, 1997.
- K.M.A. Samdani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mehr Khan Malik, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in all Petitions).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 22‑10‑1997 of the Federal Service Tribunal passed in Appeal Nos.314(K)/97, 320(x)/97, 324(x)/97 etc.). ‑‑‑‑S.2‑A [added by Service Tribunals (Amendment) Act (XVII of 1997)]‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)‑‑‑Employees of statutory Corporation‑‑‑Termination of services‑‑‑Constitutional petition filed before High Court was dismissed on the ground that on account of insertion of new S.2‑A in Service Tribunals Act, 1973, High Court had no jurisdiction‑‑‑Employees, thereafter, filed appeals before Service Tribunal which were dismissed on the ground that termination of services having been effected before insertion of S.2 A in Service Tribunals Act, 1973, they had no jurisdiction‑‑‑validity‑‑‑Question of law as to interpretation of newly inserted‑S.2‑A, Service Tribunals Act, 1973 being involved and such question being 'of public importance, leave to appeal was granted to consider as to what was the effect of insertion of newly added S.2‑A of the Ordinance on the rights of aggrieved persons as to the forum to seek remedy and as to whether Service Tribunal was vested with power to entertain appeals of employees and had declined to exercise jurisdiction.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.
This common order will dispose of C.P. Nos. 1240 to 1263 of 1997 as question of facts and law are identical in all of them.
2. The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment dated 22nd October, 1997 of the Federal Service Tribunal through which their appeals against the order of Karachi Electric Supply Corporation terminating their services have been dismissed.
3. The Services of the petitioners who are employees of the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation were terminated in March, 1997. They filed civil suits challenging the said order on the original side of High Court of Sindh, Karachi in which through interim orders, the orders of termination of their services were suspended by virtue of which they are still in service. On 10th June, 1997, section 2-A was inserted by way of amendment in the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 according to which the service of Statutory Corporations and other Autonomous Bodies under the control of the Federal Government was'-declared to be service Statutory Bodies was declared to be a civil servant.
4. According to Mr. K.M.A. Samdani, ASC, in the similar suits of the other employees, the Sindh High Court took the view that in view of this amendment in the Service Tribunals Act, their suits stood abated suggesting that the remedy to file appeal before the Service Tribunal.
5. The petitioners as abundant precaution in order to secure their right to avail remedy against the orders of termination of their service filed appeals before the Federal Service Tribunal which have been dismissed by the said Tribunal through the impugned judgment on the ground that it was not vested with the power to entertain the appeals as the impugned order was passed before coming into force of amending Act on 10th June, 1997 as a result of which the petitioners have been left within no remedy as on the one hand, the view taken by the High court in such cases was that the remedy was available before the Service Tribunal whereas the Service Tribunal took the view that it was not vested with the jurisdiction to entertain the appeals. Since a question of law as to interpretation of newly-inserted section 2-A of the Service Tribunal Act and its vires which is a question of public importance, is involved, we grant leave to appeal to consider as to what is the effect of the insertion of the said section on the rights of the aggrieved persons as to the forum to seek remedy and as to whether Service Tribunal was vested with power to entertain appeals of the petitioners and had declined to exercise jurisdiction. The parties shall be at liberty to raise other points at the time of hearing of the appeals. Since the petitioners are still in service as noted above, therefore, we order that status quo in respect thereof shall be maintained till the disposal of the appeals. A.A./G-11/S Leave granted.