' KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, J.---The petitioner impugns order dated 9-8-2011, passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby his appeal was dismissed on the ground that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in matters relating to terms and conditions of service of the employees of respondent-bank.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is admittedly an employee of the respondent- bank, has opted for Voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme on 12-11-2001. Thereafter, on 22-11-.2001, he applied the management of the respondent-bank for cancellation/rejection of his VHS request; but after not receiving any satisfactory reply, he filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the same has been abated in view of the judgment of this Court reported as Muhammad Mubeen-ul-Islam v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2006 Supreme Court 602). After the judgment of this Court in the case of Raja Riaz v.
Chairman, Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (2008 SCM R 402), the petitioner filed a Miscellaneous Application fot recalling the order of the Assistant Registrar and the Tribunal after recalling the order of abatement dismissed the appeal on the ground that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the matter, as the petitioner is an employee of the Bank. Hence, this petition.
3. Mr. Sanauallh Noor Ghouri, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner has contended that section 2-A of the Service Tribunal Act 1973 was repealed on 5th March, 2010 whereas the appeal was filed before the Tribunal much prior. To said date and as such the Tribunal ought to have decided the appeal on merits.
4. We have taken into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the impugned order. In reply to a Court query whether the respondent-bank has any statutory rules and if so whether the petitioner can be termed as a civil servant, the learned counsel has frankly conceded that the petitioner is not a civil servant.
5. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a civil servant and if the respondent-bank has any statutory rules, the remedy lies before the High Court and not before the Tribunal. In our considered opinion, the A Tribunal has rightly non-suited the petitioner, vide impugned order dated 9-8-2011, which does not call for any interference by this Court.
6. Moreover, no question of law of public importance within the meaning of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been pointed out.
7. Consequently, the listed petition lacking in merit stands dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.