Find a Lawyer

Case No: 654 of 1974, decided on 13th January 1974.

. 4‑Appeal‑Secretaries of Union Councils of Defunct Basic Democracies set up deemed appointed to newly created temporary posts of Rural Development Works only w.e.f. 1‑11‑1973 by virtue of memo dated 5‑12‑1973 issued by Director‑General, People Works Programme‑Secretaries of Union Councils hence not Civil Servants prior to 1‑I1‑1973‑Appellant a Secretary of Union Council dis missed on 10‑2‑1973 and his appeal to Commissioner dismissed on 22‑9‑1973‑Appeallant, held, not being a Civil Servant on date of impugned order, appeal to Service Tribunal incompetent.

‑The appellant Muhamma9 Malook son of Faiz Muhammad was posted as Secretary, Union Council No. 31, Qalmpur, Tehsil Minchinabad District Bahawalnagar in 1974. The Assistant Director, Basic Democracies, by his letter dated 18‑5‑71 accused him of responsibility in embezzlement of Union Council funds and called for his explanation. He was charge‑sheeted and an enquiry was hold, and after due process the Collector, Behawalnagar in his capacity of controlling authority for Union Councils in the district, dismissed the appellant from service w.e.f. 4‑1‑73 by order dated 10‑2‑73. The appellant challenged this order in appeal before the Commissioner, Bahawalpur Division, who dismissed the appeal by order dated, 22‑9‑73. Thereafter the appellant filed declaratory suit before the civil Court challenging his dismissal from service. That suit was abated by the order dated, 27‑9‑74.

In due course, the Local Government Department was reorganized and the Directorate of Peoples Works Programme was created. By Memorandum dated the 5th December, 1973, issued by the Director‑General, Peoples Works Programme, it was stated that the Secretaries of Union Councils of the defunct Basic Democracies set up would be deemed to have been appointed w. e. f. 1‑11‑73 to the newly‑created temporary posts of Rural Development Works under the Peoples Works Programme. It is therefore, clear and is admitted by the parties that prior to this date t, e. 1‑11‑75, the Secretaries of Union Councils were not civil servants within the meaning of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974. The appellant's order of dismissal was made on 10‑2‑'33 and his appeal to the Commissioner was dismissed by the order dated, 22‑9‑73. It is clear therefore that the appellant is not and was not a civil servant on the date of the impugned order. As such this appeal before us is incompetent and is hereby dismissed. The appellant may, if he is so advised, pursue his remedy before an appropriate forum.

. I also agree with the conclusion above.

Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.