1. The Petitioner through this petition has prayed for the following reliefs:
(a) It may be declared that the orders Annexures B and C passed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are illegal, without lawful authority, without jurisdiction, void and nullity in law.
(b) Cost of the petition.
(c) Any further relief or reliefs which this Honourable Court deem fit and proper.
2. The facts which give rise to this petition are that the respondent No.3 is employed as Shunter in Pakistan Railway and is posted at Loco Shed, Kotri. One Mr. Farzand Hussain, Loco Shed Incharge.
3. Dadu having gone on leave, the respondent No.3 was posted at Dadu to act as Loco Shed Incharge in the leave vacancy. The respondent No-3 worked as Loco Shed incharge at Dadu from 17-12-1977 to 30-12-1977. The respondent No.3 filed an application under section 15 of Payment of Wages Act before respondent No.2 being case No.43 of 1978 claiming a sum of Rs.280 as daily allowance alleging that he is entitled to Daily Allowance for the duties performed by him at Dadu from 17-12- 1977 to 30-12-1977. The respondent No.3 further claimed a sum of Rs.2,800 being compensation at 10 times alleging that the said amount of Daily Allowance was illegally deducted. The petitioner contested the claim of the respondent No.3 and contended that daily allowance being a kind of travelling allowance is excluded from the definition of wages as laid down in section 2(vi) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and hence respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction. It was further contended that the respondent No.3 is not entitled to any Daily Allowance. The respondent No.2 after recording the evidence of the parties and after taking into consideration the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties allowed the application, vide order, dated 15-4-1979. The petitioner challenged the order of the respondent No.2 by filing an appeal the same was dismissed by the learned respondent No.1, vide order, dated 11-10-1979. The result was that the order of the respondent No.2 was affirmed, hence this petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction in the matter and the respondent 3 is not entitled to the claim of his application or any part thereof.
5. The respondent No.3 received the notice for today---s date of hearing and he chose remain absent for the reasons best known to him.
6. Before reverting to the contents of the learned counsel for the petitioner it is advantageous to reproduce section 2(vi) of the payment of Wages Act, 1936 which reads as under:-
(vi) "Wages" means all remuneration, capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of the contract of employment, expressed or implied, were fulfilled, be payable, whether conditionally upon the regular attendance, good work or conduct or other behaviour of the person employed or otherwise to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment, and includes any bonus or other additional remuneration of the nature aforesaid which would be as payable and any sum payable to such person by reason of the termination of his employment, but does not include:-
(a) the value of any house accommodation, supply of light water, medical attendance or any amenity or of any service excluded by general or special order of the (Provincial Government).
(b) any contribution paid by the employer to any pension fund or Provident fund;
(c) any travelling allowance or the value of travelling concession;
(d) any sum paid to the person employed to defray special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment; or
(e) any gratuity payable on discharge."
7. Rule 202 of Pakistan Railways Code, Volume 1 describes the different kinds of travelling allowance.
8. Rule 202 is reproduced below:- "Different kinds of Travelling Allowance.--The following are the different kinds of travelling allowance:
(1) Daily allowance.
(2) Mileage allowance.
(3) Permanent or consolidated travelling allowance.
(4) Conveyance allowance.
(5) Actual cost of travelling."
9. Rule 208 of Pakistan Railways Code, Volume 1 reads as under:- "The point in any station at which a journey is held to commence or end is the railway station provided that a journey on transfer shall be held to begin and end at the actual residence of the railway servant concerned."
10. The nearing reading of section 2(vi) of the Payment t1f Wages Act, 1936 shows that the daily allowance which is a kind of travelling allowance having been excluded from the definition of wages. Rule 202 of the Pakistan Railway Establishment Code, Volume I provides that daily allowance is one of the kinds of travelling allowance. Rule 203 thereof provides that daily allowance may be drawn by a railway servant who is not in receipt of a permanent travelling allowance, on any day on which he proceeds on tour beyond a radius of five miles from his headquarters or returns to his headquarters from a similar distance.
11. I am of the opinion that the respondent No.2 has acted illegally and without lawful authority in observing and holding that daily allowance is admissible under the rules framed by the Railway. I am of the vies, that the definition of wages as contained in section 2(vi) of the Ace read with Rule 202 of the Code clearly excludes the jurisdiction of respondent No.2 in entertaining the application under section 15 of the Act.
12. In that view of the matter since the basic order of respondent. No.2 is nullity and without jurisdiction and is against the law. Th order, dated 15-4-1979 is void. The appeal based thereon is also void. See Yousuf Ali v. Muhammad Aslam Zia PLD 1958 SC 104 and Mst. Abida and another v. Haji Muhammad Boota and 3 others PLD 1976 SC 41.
13. In view of this it is not necessary to deal with the second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
14. The upshot of the discussion is that the orders and proceedings in this case are declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequences against the petitioner and the application filed by the Respondent is dismissed with no order as to costs.