' ARSHAD NOOR KHAN, J.--- By this common judgment I intend to dispose of aforementioned ten labour appeals, as common question of law is involved in all these appeals.
2. The appellants have challenged the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court No,VI, Hyderabad, whereby the respondents were ordered to be reinstated in the service of the appellant.
3. The respondents were employed in the appellant-Bank, however, during the course of their service the respondents were allegedly involved in fraud and forgery etc., therefore, they were charged-sheeted and after holding an inquiry they were dismissed from service. The respondents being aggrieved against the dismissal of their service served a grievance notice on the appellant and thereafter filed separate appeals before the Federal Service Tribunal, however, during the course of pendency of the appeals before Federal Service Tribunal, the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam v. Federation of Pakistan was reported in PLD 2006 SC 602 and relying on this case the appeals filed by the respondent before the Federal Service Tribunal were declared abated by the Registrar, Federal Service Tribunal vide his order, dated 27-6-2006, which were communicated to the respondents that the appeals filed by them have been abated in view of the order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Mubeen-us-Salam. The respondents after receipt of the said order from the Registrar Federal Service Tribunal filed grievance petitions before the Labour Court, where the petitions were proceeded and after recording of the evidence, the petitions were allowed, thereby directing the appellants to reinstate the respondents in service. Hence the present appeal.
4. I have heard Mr. Chaudhry Muhammad Ashraf learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Ayaz Hussain Tunio, learned counsel for respondent in Labour Appeal No,117 of 2007 and have gone through the entire material available before me.
5. Mr. Chaudhry Muhammad Ashraf, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the Registrar Federal Service Tribunal was wholly incompetent to pass order regarding abatement of the appeals filed by the respondents and the Tribunal itself was competent to pass such order and it was also clarified by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Raja Riaz v. Chairman Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, Karachi 2008 SCM R 402, wherein it has been observed by the Honourable Supreme Court that the order of abatement of the appeal passed by the Registrar Federal Service Tribunal was not legal and proper and the Tribunal was itself competent to pass the order after examination of each case and that said reported case was followed by this Court in C.P. No,D-761 of 2006 and while relying upon the case of Raja Riaz (supra), the case of the petitioner was ordered to be heard by Federal Service Tribunal. The Photostat copy of the order passed in C.P. No,D-761 of 2006 is kept on record. According to learned counsel for the appellants during pendency of the appeal of the respondents before the Federal Service Tribunal the proceedings before the Labour Court and orders passed by it were void ab initio, as such the orders passed by the learned Labour Court are not sustainable.
6. Mr. Ayaz Hussain Tunio, learned counsel for the respondent ILL Labour Appeal No,117 of 2007 has supported the order passed by the learned Labour Court.
7. I have considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties and have gone through the material available before me. Admittedly, the respondents had filed appeals against the dismissal of their services, which were pending adjudication before the Federal Service Tribunal and because of reporting of the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam, the appeals filed by the respondents were ordered to be abated by the Registrar Federal Service Tribunal. The said point also came for consideration before the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Raja Riaz v. Chairman Pak.
Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, Karachi 2008 SCM R 402, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court was pleased to observe that the order passed by the Registrar Federal Service Tribunal was not proper order, as the Tribunal itself had to pass the order regarding abatement of appeal. The relevant observation made by Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Raja Riaz (supra) is usefully quoted herein below for the sake of convenience:--- "(1) .........................................................................................................................
(2) .......................................................................................................................
(3) We are not inclined to agree with the submission of learned counsel for the respondent because separate order is required to be passed in every case by the Service Tribunal after providing opportunity to the parties keeping in view the observation made by this Court in the judgment relied upon.
(4) Thus, for the foregoing reasons, notice of information that appeals have abated cannot be considered as judicial order. As such it would be deemed that appeal of appellant is pending on the file of FST and is required to be disposed."
8. The dictum laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Raja Riaz (supra) in my humble opinion leave no room of doubt regarding pendency of appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal and in view of the aforesaid reported case of the Honourable Supreme Court the appeals filed by the respondents are still pending adjudication before the Federal Service Tribunal and Federal Service Tribunal is competent to adjudicate upon the said appeal in accordance with law.
9. In view of the aforesaid legal proposition involved in the case, there is no doubt that the Labour Court was wholly incompetent to proceed with the cases of the respondents as the appeals of the respondents are pending before the Federal Service Tribunal, as such the labour appeals are allowed and the order passed by the learned Labour Court being void ab initio are set aside with the direction to the respondents to pursue their appeals pending before the learned Federal Service Tribunal and the learned Federal Service Tribunal is required to dispose of the appeals filed by the respondents and pending before it in accordance with the observation made by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Raja Riaz (supra).
10. The amount deposited by the appellants in pursuance of the order passed by the Labour Court may be returned to the appellants with the direction to the appellants that in case, if they succeed in the appeals pending before Federal Service Tribunal, they will release it to them in accordance with their entitlement lawfully.