' MR. JUSTICE SHAH ABDUR RASHID (CHAIRMAN).-The appellant was originally an employee of the Electricity Department of the N.-W.F.P. On the establishment of the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) under the Water and Power Development Authority Act (W. P. Act No, XXXI of 1958), he was required to serve the WAPDA in accordance with first provise to subsection (1) of section 17 of the WAPDA Act. He applied for leave preparatory to retirement (L.P.R.) on 19th February, 1981 but before he could receive an order on his application, he sought to withdraw his prayer for L.P.R. By another application dated 20th May, 1981. Despite that, the appellant was sanctioned L.P.R.
And was relieved from duties with effect from 15th August, 1981. The appellant, after exhausting the departmental remedy, has approached this Tribunal by way of appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973).
2. The learned counsel for respondent WAPDA has raised preliminary objection with regard to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal. He has argued that the appellant, being on deputation from N.-W.F.P. To WAPDA, never acquired the status of a civil servant so' as to entitle him to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
3. The status of civil servant is conferred on the persons holding a post under the WAPDA by subsection (1-B) of section 17 of the WAPDA Act. The said subsection reads as follows : (1-B) Service under the Authority is hereby declared to be service of Pakistan and every person holding a post under the Authority, not being a person who is on deputation to the Authority from any Province, shall be deemed to be a civil servant for the purposes of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973.
' The learned counsel for WAPDA has argued that since the appellant was on deputation from N.- W.F.P. To the WAPDA, he was not a civil servant for the purposes of the Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973).
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the case of Ali Akhtar Sohail v. Chairman, WAPDA and another where in para. 14, a Bench of the Tribunal has indirectly admitted the status of a person placed in a similar situation to be a civil servant. However, when the aforesaid case was argued before the Tribunal, its attention had not been drawn to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Jehanzeb Khan v. Water and Power Development Authority . In that case also, Jehanzeb Kban was an em- 1 ployee of the N.-W.F.P. And was serving under the Authority. He was retired from service under section 17 (1-A) of the WAPDA Act. He approached this Tribunal which refused jurisdiction by observing as follows : " Not being a civil servant, as defined in section 2 (b) (1) of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 read with section 2(a) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, and the fact that section 17 (1-B' of Act LXXXIV of 1975 does not include a person on deputation to the Authority from any Province, the petition is not entertainable under section 4 (1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973."
Jehanzeb Khan went to the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal, but that Tribunal too refused to exercise jurisdiction. In appeal, the Supreme Court observed that Jehanzeb was to pursue his remedy before the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal as a civil servant of that Province under the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunals Act, 1974.
5. The matter, in view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, stands finally decided.
However, it may be mentioned that Article 12 of the Province of West Pakistan (Dissolution) Order, 1970 (P.O. No, 1 of 1970) may be taken to give the impression that the employees of the Provinces who were on deputation to the WAPDA became civil servants under the Federation. A bare reading of Article 12 would show that no doubt the power of the Provincial Government in respect of WAPDA and its employees is to be exercised by the President, nevertheless, it nowhere provides that the persons who are on deputation from the Provinces to the WAPDA would become civil servants under the Federation. In fact, in 1979 the Employees of the Water and Power Development Authority (Allocation to Provinces Order, 1979 (P.
0. No, 4 of 1979) was promulgated, and by virtue of Article 2 thereof, the employees who, before the dissolution of the Province o West Pakistan, were employees of that Province, were re-allocated to the Provinces to which they belonged, either by virtue of previous service or by virtue of their permanent residence. The appellant thus became an employ of the N.-W.F.P.
6. In view of the above facts, therefore, we uphold .The objection raised by the respondent-WAPDA.
And dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 1983 PLC (C. S.) 343 1981 SCM R 1178