' SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.---This Appeal, by leave of the Court, impugns the Judgment of the learned Federal Service Tribunal (Karachi) filed by the Appellant whereby same was dismissed.
2. Factually the adverse order against the Appellant whereby he was reverted was passed on 05.09.2003 against which he preferred a Departmental Appeal on 15.09.2003 and same having been rejected on 03.10.2003 he approached the learned Service Tribunal on 24.10.2003. The matter kept pending there for a considerable time and eventually was decided against the Appellant on 28.04.2009 when he approached this Court on 30.06.2009. On the last date of hearing we had directed both the learned ASCs for parties to go through the case of Pakistan Defence Officers'
Housing Authority v. Jawaid Ahmed (2013 SCM R 1707) and on an earlier occasion also directed them to go through the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam and others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Defence and others (PLD 2006 SC 602) in order to resolve the jurisdictional aspect of the matter. Today both the learned ASCs conceded that in view of the law laid down in the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam and others (supra) the Appellant's Appeal before the learned Service Tribunal filed in the year 2003 had abated and hence his only other remedy was either to file a civil suit or to approach the learned High Court in Constitutional Jurisdiction within 90 days thereof.
3. Mr. Syed Abdul Waheed, learned ASC appearing for the Appellant has submitted that the Appellant should not be penalized for the act of the Tribunal as it was the Tribunal who went ahead and heard and decided the case in the year 2009 whereafter in sixty days of the passing of the impugned Judgment the Appellant approached this Court. He has therefore prayed that the Appeal No, 854 (K)/CE/2003) filed by the Appellant before the learned Service Tribunal be deemed to be pending before the learned Sindh High Court and such Orders be issued to the learned Service Tribunal at Karachi. In support of his submission he has relied upon the case of Pakistan Defence Officers' Housing Authority (supra) and particularly para-50(v) thereof where all disciplinary proceedings which had been initiated under the RSO (2000) and any order passed or action taken in disregard of the said law would be amenable to the Writ Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution.
4. On the other hand Mr. Izhar Alam Farooqi, learned ASC appearing for the Respondent No, 1 has submitted that when the Appeal of the Appellant had abated before the learned Service Tribunal in the year 2006 when the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam and others (supra) was decided and his only remedy was before the Civil Court as this was a case of master and servant since the Respondent No, 1 does not have any statutory rules and regulations.
5. We have heard both the learned ASC and perused the impugned Judgment and the relevant law.
6. In our opinion admittedly the Pakistan Steel Mills Corporation is a company incorporated under the Companies Act but nonetheless it is fully owned by the Government of Pakistan and is performing a function of the State since it is the largest producer of steel in the country. Even otherwise under Para 50(V) of the Pakistan Defence Officers' Housing Authority (supra) it has been held very clearly that all disciplinary proceedings initiated under the RSO (2000) can be assailed before the concerned High Court. Although the Appeal filed by the Appellant had abated before the learned Service Tribunal in the year 2006 pursuant to the case of Muhammad Mubeen-us- Salam and others (supra) but yet the Tribunal continued to adjudicate the same and passed the final Order on 30.06.2009 which was assailed before this Court by the Appellant in the circumstances we are of the opinion that the Appellant cannot be faulted for not following his appropriate remedy. Consequently the Appellant's Appeal before the learned Federal Service Tribunal bearing No, 854 (K)/CE/2003 filed at Karachi stands transferred to the learned Sindh High Court and shall be deemed to be pending there to be decided in accordance with the law.
7. The Appeal stands disposed of in the foregoing terms.