' Although the case is in motion hearing yet with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it has been taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner was serving as Accounts Officer in B.S.16 in the Punjab Employees Social Security Institution (hereinafter referred to as the Institution). Departmental proceedings, under the, Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 (duly adopted by the Institution), were taken against him and major penalty of compulsory retirement from service was imposed upon him vide order dated 11-2-1999. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority (the Minister).
This appeal was allowed vide order dated 12-10-1999. Instead of complying with the order of the Appellate Authority, respondent No,2 submitted the case to the Secretary Labour and Manpower/Chairman of the Governing Body for review of the order of reinstatement of the petitioner. Meanwhile, the Secretary Labour and Manpower had been designated as the Appellate Authority. The case was referred by the Labour Department to the Services Department, who advised, vide their letter dated 13-7-2000, that the order passed by the Appellate Authority could not be reviewed by the successor because no such provision exists in the Efficiency and Discipline Rules. The petitioner even approached the learned Provincial Ombudsman, who rendered an order favorable to kw petitioner on 30-12-2000. However, on the representation of Secretary, Labour, to the Governor, the said order was set aside on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to interfere in a service matter. Meanwhile, the matter was placed before the Governing Body in 77th meeting held on 5-12-2000, who decided not to reinstate the petitioner. This decision has been assailed in this petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Governing Body constituted under the Punjab Employees Social Security Ordinance (X of 1965) had no jurisdiction whatsoever to nullify the order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. Reliance was also placed on Punjab Employees Social Security Institution, Lahore and others v. Manzoor Hussain Khan and others (1992 PLC (C.S.) 417). The learned counsel also produced in the Court letter dated 15-8-2000 from the Institution addressed to the Section Officer, Government of the Punjab in the Labour and Manpower Department, according to which, "the competent authority has decided that PESSI shall honour and implement the decision of the Secretary Labour, Punjab/Chairman Governing Body, PESSI". This letter was in response to the letter dated 24-7-2000 addressed by the Labour Department to the Commissioner of the Institution requiring the comments of the Commissioner with reference to the advice of the Services Department contained in letter dated 13-7-2000. And, vide letter dated 26-8-2000 of the Labour Department, the Director of the Institution was instructed to take further necessary action according to advice of the Regulation Wirg of the Services Department contained in the letter dated 13-7-2000.
5. On the other hand the learned counsel, representing respondents Nos.1 and 2, has tried to feebly defend the impugned decision of the Governing Body of the Institution. According to him, the Governing Body has a supervisory capacity and, therefore, had the necessary jurisdiction to decide whether the order of reinstatement passed by the Appellate Authority should or should not be implemented.
6. The learned Additional Advocate-General appearing for respondent No,3, submits that the Institution should have proceeded in the matter in accordance with the advice of the Regulation Wing of the Services Department.
7. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties have been considered. The Governing Body for the Institution was created under section 5 of the Ordinance X of 1965 while its powers have been given in section 6 which are as follows:-- "(1) to approve the budget estimates, the audited accounts and the annual report of the Institution for submission to Government in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance; and
(2) to call for any information, or direct any research to be made for the furtherance of the objects of this Ordinance."
' The aforesaid powers do not authorize the Governing Body to interfere in an order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. In the absence of any power to review the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, aforesaid the order passed by the Appellate Authority had attained finality and could not be interfered with The Governing Body of the Institution, therefore, transgressed the limits of law to undo the order passed by the Appellate Authority.
8. For what has been stated above, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15-12- 2000 of the Governing Body is declared as without lawful authority and respondents Nos.1 and 2 are directed to forthwith take the petitioner on duty and release his due salary. No order as to costs.