| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4570 2025 SLD 4570 = 2025 SCP 393 |
CIVIL APPEALS NO.1195 OF 2015, 735 OF 2016, 680, 1129, 1166, 1180, 1553 OF 2020, 83, 456, 747, 770, 796, 1369, 1479 OF 2021 AND CIVIL PETITIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.307 TO 309, 335 TO 358, 423, 1337 OF 2020, 2655, 3997 OF 2019, 609-P OF 2015, 1686 OF 2020, 7, 1416, 1417, 1479 OF 2021, 515-L OF 2021, 1767-L, 2419-L OF 2019, 975-L OF 2017, 2481-L OF 2019, 875-L, 908-L, 952-L OF 2017, 2643-L OF 2016, 357-L OF 2022, 252-L, 80-L OF 2019, 435-L, 755-L OF 2022, 386-L OF 2023, 1989-L OF 2020, 834-L OF 2019, 1392-L, 840-L OF 2021, 1621-L OF 2020, 379-L OF 2023, 1179-L OF 2019, 99-L OF 2021, 2407-L OF 2016, 1579-L, 1811-L, 1779-L, 2133-L, 2305-L, 2105-L, 2097-L OF 2017, 1853-L, 1107-L, 1093-L, 2255-L OF 2016, 234-L, 2007-L OF 2017, 1595-L, 1639-L, 1775-L, 1796-L OF 2020, 545-L, 869-L OF 2021, 2902-L, 3399-L, 3503-L OF 2019, 814-L OF 2021, 1435-L OF 2020, 2031- L OF 2019, 672-L OF 2023, 504-L OF 2020, 3266-L OF 2016, 2519-L, 2399-L OF 2018, 132-L, 727-L, 907-L, 1117-L, 1230-L, 1282-L, 1291-L, 1576-L, 1592-L, 1615-L, 1827-L, 1890-L, 1968-L OF 2020, 27-L, 200-L, 204-L, 248-L, 271-L, 470-L, 559-L, 598-L, 632-L, 665-L, 704-L, 705-L, 864-L, 1031-L, 1042-L, 1102- L, 1258-L, 1754-L, 1971-L, 2173-L, 2243-L, 2296-L OF 2021 AND 1075-L OF 2017
Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar Mrs. Justice Ayesha A. Malik Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb
For the Appellant(s)/ Petitioner(s) Mr. Aftab Alam Yasir, ASC (in CA.735 of 2016 and CP.1686 of 2020) Mr. Adnan Khan, ASC (in CA.680 of 2020) Mr. Junaid Jabbar Khan, ASC (in CA.1129 of 2020 and CP.357-L of 2022) Mr. Mahmood Ahmad Qazi, ASC (in CA.1166 of 2020 & CP.1767-L of 2019) Kh. Shahid Rasool, ASC (in CA.1180 of 2020) In person (in CA.1553 of 2020) Ms. Shireen Imran, ASC (in CA.83 of 2021) Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Khan, ASC Mr. Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhotti, AOR (in CAs.456 and 770 of 2021) Mr. Bashir Khan, ASC (in CA.747 of 2021) Mr. Mudassar Khalid Abbasi, ASC (in CA.1369 of 2021 and CPs.2655 & 3997 of 2019) Hafiz Noor Muhammad, ASC (in CPs.307 to 309, 335 to 358 and 423 of 2020) Mr. Shafqat Abbasi, Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan (in CP.1337 of 2020) Mr. Salman Riaz Ch., ASC (in CP.2419-L of 2019) Mr. Aftab Ahmad Bajwa, ASC (in CP.975-L of 2017) Mr. Sultan Mehmood Dar, ASC (in CP.2481-L of 2019) Mr. Zafar Iqbal Chohan, ASC (in CP.952-L of 2017) Mr. Muhammad Irfan Malik, ASC (in CPs.252-L of 2019 and 840-L of 2021) Ch. Tariq Javed, ASC (in CPs.80-L of 2019, 1392-L, 2097-L, 814-L of 2021, 2519-L of 2018, 727-L, 1592-L, 1968-L of 2020 and 204-L of 2021) For the Respondents : Mr. Jawad M. Pasha, ASC (via video link from Lahore) Mr. Farman Ullah Khattak, ASC Dr. Mushtaq, DSP Mr. Amjad Hussain, DSP, Special Branch Mr. Imran Rasheed, DSP, Rajanpur Mr. Zaman, Assistant Superintendent, G.P.O. Mr. Basharat Mughal, Assistant Superintendent, G.P.O. In person (in CAs.735 of 2016 and 1553 of 2020) Mr. Ramzan Khan, ASC Mr. Shahid Kamal Khan, ASC Mr. Aftab Alam Yasir, ASC (in CP.672-L of 2023)
Law: Civil Servants Act, 1973
Section: 22
Law: Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974
Section: 21
Law: Sindh Civil Servants Act, (XIV of 1973)
Section: 23
Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants Act, (XVIII of 1973)
Section: 22
Law: Balochistan Civil Servants Act, (IX of 1974)
Section: 22
Law: Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1977
Section: 7(1)(c)
Law: Sindh Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1980
Section: 3(1)
Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986
Section: 3(1)
Law: Balochistan Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 2013
Section: 5
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 3, 5, 29(2)(b)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 212
Tagline : Departmental authorities, under the respective Civil Servants Acts and Appeal Rules, possess the power to withhold or condone delayed appeals upon showing of reasonable or sufficient cause. Where the departmental authority fails to consider an application for condonation or rejects the application, the Service Tribunal, as the first judicial appellate forum, is bound to examine the legality of that decision. The Tribunal cannot dismiss the appeal as incompetent merely because the departmental appeal was time-barred, as doing so constitutes abdication of jurisdiction and denial of the statutory right of appeal.
Summary
The Supreme Court clarified that Service Tribunals cannot automatically dismiss appeals solely because the departmental appeal was barred by time. The departmental authority has the power to condone delays based on reasonable cause as prescribed by relevant Service Laws and Rules. Even if the departmental authority refuses or ignores condonation requests, the Service Tribunal must independently assess the delay and merits of each appeal. The prior precedent (PIAC case) that held such appeals incompetent solely due to time-bar is overruled. Service Tribunals have the constitutional mandate to ensure judicial scrutiny and cannot abdicate jurisdiction by summarily dismissing time-barred appeals.
Core Points
- Service Tribunals’ appeals should not be dismissed automatically if departmental appeals are time-barred.
- Departmental authorities have powers under Service Laws and Rules to condone delay if reasonable cause is shown.
- The Limitation Act, 1908, does not strictly apply to departmental appeals but applies to appeals before Service Tribunals.
- Service Tribunals must independently assess whether the delay was condoned or whether sufficient cause exists before proceeding.
- Previous reliance on the PIAC case leading to dismissal of appeals due to delay is per incuriam and overruled.
- Appeals before Service Tribunals are a statutory right and an independent judicial forum cannot be bypassed.
- Departmental authorities must consider condonation applications and cannot ignore such applications.
- The constitutional mandate under Article 212 entrusts Service Tribunals with exclusive jurisdiction over service matters.
- Differentiation between withholding and condonation frameworks under provincial and federal rules is critical but both require discretion by departmental authorities.
- Each case must be individually examined on facts, and appeals cannot be mechanically dismissed for delay without due consideration.
Law and Section in Table Form
| Jurisdiction | Law/Act | Section/Rule | Provision Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Federal | Civil Servants Act, 1973 | Section 22 | Appeal or representation must be made within 30 days. |
| Punjab | Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 | Section 21 | Appeal or representation to be made within 60 days. |
| Sindh | Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973 | Section 23 | Appeal or representation within 30 days. |
| Khyber Pakhtunkhwa | Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants Act, 1973 | Section 22 | Appeal or representation within 30 days. |
| Balochistan | Balochistan Civil Servants Act, 1974 | Section 22 | Appeal or representation within 30 days. |
| Federal | Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1977 | Rule 7(1)(c) | Appeal may be withheld if not preferrred within time and no reasonable cause shown. |
| Punjab | Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume I | Rule 14.21(1)(c) | Appeal may be withheld if not preferred within six months and no reasonable cause. |
| Sindh | Sindh Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1980 | Rule 3(1) | Appellate authority may condone delay if cause is beyond control. |
| Khyber Pakhtunkhwa | Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986 | Rule 3(1) | Appellate authority may condone delay for reasons beyond control. |
| Balochistan | Balochistan Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 2013 | Rule 5 | Authority may entertain appeal after expiry if sufficient cause shown. |
| Limitation Act, 1908 | Limitation Act, 1908 | Sections 3, 5, 29(2)(b) | Provides limitation periods and condonation of delay only where applicable; excludes departmental appeals unless expressly made applicable. |
| Constitution of Pakistan | Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 | Article 212 | Establishes Service Tribunals with exclusive jurisdiction over service matters. |