ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--These appeals, by leave, are directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, dated 10-5-1984.
2. The facts are that Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh was employed as a Lower Division Clerk in 1967 and was working as such in the Operation Division (Electricity) WAPDA, Sukkur. He was removed from service under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act, 1958, on 4th November, 1982. He challenged the order of his removal by way of an appeal alleging mala fides against the Superintending Engineer, Mr. Ejaz Nabi Abbasi. Previously too Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh was proceeded against on different charges but was not found guilty and it was for this reason that this time he was proceeded against under section 17(1- A) of the WAPDA Act. During the hearing of the appeal, an objection as to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under section 17(1-C) of the WAPDA Act was taken but it as repelled by the learned Tribunal, and after hearing the case on merits, partly accepted the appeal of Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh to the extent that instead of his removal from service his retirement from service with proportionate pensionary benefits was ordered vide order dated 10-5-1984. This order has been challenged both by Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh as well as the WAPDA Authority.
3. Leave in these two appeals was granted to consider whether in view of the complete ouster of jurisdiction under section 17(1-C) of the WAPDA Act, 1958, could the Service Tribunal assume jurisdiction and interfere with the orders of WAPDA in respect of persons employed or serving under it.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. So far as the question of jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear appeals against the orders passed by the WAPDA is concerned, the same stands finally decided by this Court in the case of WAPDA v. Muhammad Arshad Qureshi 1986 SCM R 18, wherein it has been held that the Service Tribunal alone has the jurisdiction to adjudicate with regard to the terms and conditions of the WAPDA employees as from 30-9-1975.
5. As for the merits, the learned Tribunal after taking into consideration the material facts has held that order under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act against Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh was justified but held further that since there was no charge of corruption or dishonesty against Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh, his removal from service was converted into retirement. We have given careful consideration to the arguments advance by the parties in the light of the order of the learned Tribunal and we are of the view that the impugned order does not require any interference by us as the same is based on sound reasoning. Both the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.