Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1629 2004 SLD 1629 2004 PLC 905
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos.233-K to 236-K of 2003, decision dated: 12-02-2004. (On appeal from judgment dated 27-2-2003, passed by. the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, in Appeals Nos.239, 354, 363 and 376(K)(CE) of 2000).
RANA BHAGWANDAS, SYED DEEDAR HUSSIAN SHAH AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

PAKISTAN STEEL FABRICATING COMPANY LIMITED and another

VS

MUHAMMAD KALEEMUDDIN and 3 others

Law:

Section:

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)-------S. 4---Termination of service without issuance of show-cause notice or holding of enquiry---Service Tribunal accepted appeal of civil servant reinstating him in service with back-benefits---Validity---Neither management had paid any amount to civil servant nor their case was that they had made any payment---Tribunal had given findings of fact on issues agitated before it---Impugned was well-reasoned and based on law laid down by Supreme Court---No question of law of general public importance being involved in the case, Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave to appeal. Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeals Nos.217-K to 219-K, 59-K to 145-K, 152-K to 205-K and 220-K to 265-K of 2002 distinguished. M.G. Dastgir, Advocate Supreme Court with Raja Sher Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Respondents (in person) (in C.Ps.233-K and 236-K of 2003) Date of hearing: 12th February, 2004. JUDGMENT SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH J.---By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of these petitions, which are identical in nature and directed against a consolidated judgment, dated 27-2-2003, passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in ,Appeals Nos.239, 354, 363 and 376(K)(CE) of 2000. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that petitioners arc sister concerns, as petitioner No.1 is the 100% subsidiary of petitioner No.2 and the respondents herein were terminated by petitioner No.1 on 1-2-2000 and 2-2-2000 on the ground of no longer required. Even in the year 1992, services of the respondents were terminated, and, they challenged their termination orders before learned Labour Court, as a result thereof they were reinstated with all benefits, against which petitioners filed appeal before the learned Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal where the matter concluded in terms of compromise and respondents restarted their working with the petitioners. The respondents were again terminated without issuance of Show-Cause Notice or holding of inquiry. 3. Feeling aggrieved, respondents challenged the validity of the termination orders before the Tribunal, through appeals,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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