Find a Lawyer

Cases Nos. 599 and 600 of 1981, decided on 7th Tune, 1982.

‑‑‑Termination of service due to abolition of posts ‑ Order challenged on grounds that juniors re‑employed subsequently against post created under new Scheme‑New posts meant for certain specific category of personnel and not for appellants‑Appeal, in circum stances, held, devoid of merits and dismissed by Service Tribunal- Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4.

Mushtaq Masood for Appellant.

Haroonur Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondents.

Messrs Pervaiz Ahmad and Ali Ahmad have filed these appeals under section 4 of the. Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which they have impleaded Deputy Director, Social Welfare Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur and Director, Social Welfare Punjab, Lahore, as respondents.

2. By virtue of these appeals they have prayed that the order dated 9‑5‑1979 with regard to the termination of service w. e. f. 31‑5‑1979, be de6sred illegal and without any authority.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants were appointed as Craft Supervisors by the Assistant Director, Social Welfare Bahawalpur Division, vide order, dated 1‑3‑1973. The appellants continued to perform their duties to the satisfaction of their superiors and. their services were regularised under M. L. I. 21 w. e. f. the date of their joining as Craft Supervisors i.e. 2‑3‑1973. In 1979, upon the abolition of Social Economic and Industrial Centre the services of the appellants were terminated w. e. f. 31‑5‑1979. However, immediately after the abolition of the posts of the appellants, new schemes were approved in all the divisions including the Bahawalpur Division. Consequent upon the approval of new schemes in Bahawalpur Division the other colleagues of the appellants were taken back in service and their services were regularised. However the appellants filed a petition before the Labour Court at Bahawalpur but the same was rejected by the said court vide its order dated 17‑9‑1981 on the ground that the appellants were not the workers and therefore, they were required to seek relief before a proper forum. Hence these appeals.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. Learned District Attorney has raised two preliminary objections with regard to the maintainability of these appeals by submitting that the services of the appellants were terminated by the Deputy Director, Social Welfare, Bahawalpur vide its order dated 9‑5‑1979, and the appellants were required to file appeal against the said order before the Director‑General, Social Welfare Punjab, Lahore being next higher authority. According to the learned District Attorney these appeals were not tenable before the Punjab Service‑Tribunal, Lahore as provided under section 4(a) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974. It has been further urged that the impugned orders against which the appellants have filed these appeals, were passed in the year 1979 and they instead of going before the Service Tribunal, went before a wrong forum and spent full two years before it, therefore, these appeals were hopelessly barred by time.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to satisfy us as to why the appellants did not seek remedy before the next higher authority as provided under section 4 (a) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, and has also not been able to explain the delay which has occurred in filing these appeals before this Tribunal. However, he has adverted to the merits of the case and vehemently argued that the appellants' services were duly regularized under M.T.I. 21 w. e. f. the date of joining as Craft Supervisors on 2‑3‑1973, the respondents were not justified to terminate their services as juniors to the appellants were available and should have been the persons fit for termination.

6. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments so raised before us and find that the factual position in this case is that after the said termination of their services, a new scheme named as District Industrial Home was introduced by Government w. e. f. 1‑7‑1979, and certain Female Craft Supervisors were adjusted in the new scheme. The appellants were not adjusted in the new Scheme for the reasons given below :‑---

The Manual of Instructions for Sanatzars (District Industrial Home) provides under para. 5. of Chapter III that all technical posts should be filled from amongst the female candidates' because the scheme was meant exclusively for the training and order work of women only.

7. In view of the undisputed fact that no male person has been accommodated in the new Scheme, the claim of the appellants loses all its force that the juniors to them have been absorbed into the new seine and they have been thrown out from the service. Due to this established position we do not find any merits in this case. Moreover these appeals are clearly barred by virtue of section 4 (a) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act as the appellants have failed to exhaust the remedy so available to them, and also chose a wrong forum and thus wasted' two years in that pursuit.

8. Keeping all these points into consideration we are of the considered opinion that these appeals are liable to be dismissed. We therefore, proceed to dismiss the same as non‑maintainable, barred by time as well as being without any merits.

However, there will be no orders as to costs.

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.