Find a Lawyer

Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969).‑‑--

--‑‑Ss. 25‑A & 37‑WAPDA employee seeking redress against removal from service on account of misconduct‑Grievance petition accepted by Labour Court‑WAPDA employees civil servants for purposes of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 fall within jurisdiction of Service Tribunal‑Labour Court, could not assume jurisdiction‑Order of Labour Court set aside by appellate Tribunal‑West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958), S. 17 (1‑B) read with Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S. 4.

F. U. Malik v. WAPDA C. P.. No. 163/R of 1982 (unreported) rel.

Khan Muhammad Virk for Appellant.

Mian Muhammad Hussain for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 6th March, 1983.

This appeal calls in question the decision dated 9‑11‑81 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 7, Gujranwala, whereby the respondent was directed to be re‑instated in service with hack benefits.

2. The misconduct for which the respondent was removed from service was habitual negligence. The auditing party made report against him on 7‑6‑1980 that he had no; carried forward the balances of January, 1979 and March, 1979 in the next months that he had made double entries of deposits in two cases and made wrong entry of deposit in one case. So in all there were five instances of working negligently. The details of double postings are as under :‑

(1) Rs. 149.24 were to be posted against Account No. BCW/333‑S but it was posted against the said account as well as against Account No. BCW/304‑S.

(2) Rs. 167.74 related to Account No. BCW/468‑M but besides posting the amount against the said account it was also posted against Account No. BCW/61.

(3) Wrong posting was 'made in this manner that an amount of . Rs. 293.38 of N.B.P Begowala pertained to Account No. CB‑5 but k posting was made against Account No BCW‑31.

3. The respondent is a civil servant by virtue of section 17 (1‑B) of WAPDA Act. It has been held in a recent ruling of the Supreme Court recorded in Civil Petition No. 163/R of 1982 decided on 5‑12‑1982 titled as FU. Malik v. WAPDA that on WAPDA employees are civil servants as provided by section 17 (1‑B). The observations made are as under :‑

"We have examined the contentions raised by the learned counsel and find that there could be no plausible excuse for the petitioner to have not availed of, his right as a Government Servant under the West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958 (West Pakistan Act No. XXXI of 1958) because all employees of the Authority are civil servants' as relevant section of the aforesaid Act, as amended, reads as under :‑

. . . .. .. .

. . . . .

It has been further observed :‑

"We agree with the finding of the learned Service Tribunal that the petitioner holding very responsible post of Senior Budget and Accounts Officer should have been aware of the provisions of section 17 (1‑B) of the WAPDA Act, 1958, as amended, and that the petitioner was rightly refused the condonation of delay in filing his appeal."

Since the respondent is a civil servant, the learned lower Court had no jurisdiction. I, therefore, accept the appeal and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court, direct the return of the grievance petition to the respondent.

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.