ORDER SHEET
_____________________________________________
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE
_____________________________________________
1) For orders on CMA 8364/2006
2) For katacha peshi.
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed for petitioner.
Mr. Niaz Ahmed for respondent.
__________
This petition was preferred against the order of appeal before Review Committee of the respondent No. 1 dated 29.9.1996. The petitioner was serving with the respondent No. 1 as Assistant Manager, his services were dismissed on 27.1.1993. The petitioner being dissatisfied from the order of dismissal and order dated 29.9.1996 challenged the same before the Federal Services Tribunal by resorted to file Service Appeal No. 2460(x)/97, during the pendency of the case as per verdict laid down by the Supreme Court in MUHAMMAD MUBEEN-US-SALAM AND OTHERS VS. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE AND OTHERS (PLD 2006 SC 602), Section 2-A of the Services Tribunal Act 1973 were declared ultra vires as a consequence of above judgment proceedings before the Federal Services Tribunal were abated. The petitioner has no alternate remedy therefore he has resorted to file constitution petition.
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed learned counsel for petitioner contended that from the last 14 years petitioner is running from post to pillar for seeking redress.
Conversely Mr. Niaz Ahmed Khan learned counsel for respondent has contended that direction for abatement of Supreme Court in Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam’s case was under Section 6 of Services Tribunal Act 1973, basis of the direction was that in case where services of employee / employees governed by statutory rules he could not invoke section 2-A of the Services Tribunal Act 1973 as a corollary to and as a matter of course in such case it could not possibly be said the services tribunal had no jurisdiction and after such finding it could not possibly be said that the matter pending before the Supreme Court would abate the Services Tribunal intact.
It is urged that in case MUHAMMAD IDREES VS. AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS (PLD 2007 SC 681), it has been held that cases of employees whose services were not governed by statutory rules stood abetted with the result that proceedings and judgments rendered by Services Tribunal also stood nullified and the effected persons were allowed further period of 90 days to have recourse to the available remedies and the cases in which the services of employees were governed by statutory rules were not hit by Supreme Court in MUHAMMAD MUBEEN-US-SALAM AND OTHERS VS. FEDERAL OF PAKISTAN (PLD 2006 SC 602). In case of MUHAMMAD DAWOOD AND OTHERS VS. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN (2007 SBLR SINDH 495) a full bench of this court has held:-
i) Irrespective of an employee of a State controlled corporation not being a civil servant the corporation themselves continue to remain amendable to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution.
ii) The rule of mater and servant is inapplicable to cases where there is violation of statutory provisions or of any other law.
iii) The expression “violation of law” would not be confined merely to violation of any specific provision of a statute but the expression ‘law’ as observed by Hamoodur Rehman, J, (as his lordship then was) in Government of West Pakistan VS. Begum Aga Abdul Karim Sorish (PLD 1969 SC 14 @ 31) and ought to be considered in its generic sense as connoting all that is treated as law in this country including even the judicial principles laid down from time to time by the superior courts. It means according to the accepted norms of legal process and postulates a strict performance of all the factions and duties laid down by law. It may, instance, includes the principles of natural justice, the public duty to act fairly and honestly and absence of malafides in fact and law. In all such cases the Court would be competent to grant relief of reinstatement.