KARACHI: FST to take up appeals of sacked PNSC men
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 12: The Federal Service Tribunal will take up the appeals of sacked PNSC employees on Aug 6, which involves a legal question whether employees of a company whose rules do not provide for departmental appeal can invoke the jurisdiction of the FST directly.
Sacked employees of the PNSC have challenged the order of the company whereby their services have been dispensed with effect from August 2, 2001 on receiving salary of 90 days in lieu of notice period.
M. M. Aqil Awan, counsel for the petitioner employees, contended before the two-member FST bench that the appeals had been filed without filing departmental appeal, because such a provision was not provided under the Pakistan National Shipping Corporation (Workshop Workers’ Service) Regulations of 1979.
When the counsel was confronted with the latest decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ibrahim Mangrio, he referred to the case of PIAC Vs Koural Channa, reported in NLR 2000 Service 90, NLR 2001 (s) 121, PLD 1990 SC 990, 2000 SCMR 104, 1999 SCMR 197, 2000 SCMR 826 and PLD 2002 SC 101, and contended that when there was no provision of filing departmental appeal, then in such circumstances such an appellant could directly come before the FST.
In this connection, he also referred to section 4 (1) (a) of the Service Tribunals Act of 1973. As regards the case of Ibrahim Mangrio and Gulbat Khan, he contended that both of them were employees of Wapda, and under the Wapda Rules, there was provision of departmental appeal. But these two incumbents had approached the FST against the order, which had been passed under Rule 12 of the Wapda Act, where there was no such provision for filing departmental appeal. Thus their appeals had been dismissed on the ground of limitation.
However, the Supreme Court was of the view that filing of departmental appeal was a condition precedent, whereas in the case of Ibrahim Mangrio, the appellant had not filed his departmental appeal at all. In such circumstances, counsel Awan contended that looking to the observations of the Supreme Court in various reported cases, these appeals be admitted so that the matter be thrashed out once and for all.
Section 4 (1) (a) of the Service Tribunals Act of 1973 says that “where an appeal, review or representation to a departmental authority is provided under the Civil Servants Ordinance of 1973, or any rule against any such order, no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal unless the aggrieved civil servant has preferred an appeal or application for review or representation to such departmental authority and a period of ninety days has elapsed from the date on which such appeal, application or representation was so preferred.”
The bench also took note of the Regulation 63 of the National Shipping Corporation (Workshop Workers’ Service) Regulations of 1979, which deals with the appeal, and clause (f) says:
“(f) No appeal shall lie against an order passed by the Board.” Whereas regulation 63 (a) says: ‘(a) A worker shall have the right of appeal, as provided hereunder, against any of the punishments imposed.’”
