Law: Service Tribunals Act, 1973

Section: 2,2-A,4

Law: Workmens Compensation Act, 1923

Section: (xiii)

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)---   ----Ss. 2, 2-A 4--Workmens Compensation Act (VIII of 1923), Sched. II, cl.(xiii)---Appeal to Service Tribunal---Competency---Appellant, in the case, admittedly was a workman as envisaged under cl.(xiii) of Sched. II of Workmens Compensation Act, 1923---Appellant in circumstances was not a civil servant under S.2(1)(b) of Civil Servants Act, 1973---Appellant. had filed appeal under S.4 read with S.2 of Service Tribunals Act, 1973, but it should have been filed under S.2-A of said Act and not under S.2 thereof as he was a `workman---Section 2-A of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 having been declared as ultra Vires by the Supreme Court, appeal stood abated---Appellant could seek his remedy before the Labour Court of competent jurisdiction.    Zahir Ullah and 13 others v. Chairman, WAPDA Lahore, and others 2000 SCMR 826 and Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam and others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Defence Government of Pakistan and others PLD 2006 SC 602 rel. JUDGMENT QAZI MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI (MEMBER).---Advocates for the parties present. Heard them and perused the record. 2. The appellant was, admittedly, a workman, as envisaged under clause (xiii) of Schedule-II of the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923, which is reproduced as under:-- (xiii) employed as an inspector, mail guard, sorter or van peon in the Railway Mail Service, or employed in any occupation ordinarily involving outdoor work in the Posts and Telegraphs Department; or 3. In view of the above definition of workman, the appellant was not a civil…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492