DECISION ' The aforementioned Appeals Nos, SUK-19/90 and 47/90 are directed against order, dated 19-12- 1989 and Appeal No, 82/90 against the order, dated 5-3-1990, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, VII at Sukkur. The aforementioned appeals pertain to the cases of employees of WAPDA. A legal objection has been raised by Mr. Manzar Alam, learned counsel for WAPDA to the effect, that the learned Labour Court had no jurisdiction. As this legal objection is common in all these appc als, I will dispose them of by this single decision.
2. I have heard Mr. Manzar Alam, learned Advocate for the appellants in Appeal No, 19/90 and for respondents in Appeals Nos, 47/90 and 82/90, Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Shaikh, learned Advocate for appellant in Appeal No, 82/90 and Mr. Saddiq Ansari, holding brief for Mr. Amanullah Shaikh, learned Advocate for appellant in Appeal No, 47/90 and for respondent in Appeal No, 19/90.
3. It is not disputed that the workmen parties to these appeals are employees of WAPDA. Under the West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958 an 'Authority' was established under section 3 of the Act for carrying out the purposes of the Act. By Ordinance (LXXXVI of 1975) dated 30-9-1975 subsection (1-B) was added to section 17 of the said Act of 1958 which reads as under-:-- "(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 (LXX of 1973)." - ' By another amendment introduced by Ordinance LXXII of 1979, dated 29-12-1979 subsection (1-C) was added to section 17 in the following words:-- "(1-C).--Any order of removal or termination of service passed by the Authority, in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1-A), shall not be called in question in any proceedings taken under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (XXIII of 1969), or the Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952 (LIII of 1952), or under any taw for the time being in force, before any Court, Tribunal or Commission and any order passed by any Court, Tribunal or Commission after the thirtieth day of September, 1975, and before the coming into force of the West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (amendment) Ordinance, 19i9 setting aside or modifying or declaring any order of the Authority to be void and of no effect, shall stand vacated."
4. The import of these two subsections viz. Section 17(1-B) and section 17(1-C) was considered at length by their Lordships in number of appeals disposed of by a single decision reported in 1986 SCM R 18. Theif Lordships held the Service Tribunal alone had jurisdiction to adjudicate with regard to terms and conditions of WAPDA employees as from 30-9-1975 jurisdiction of all other Courts, Tribunals, Commissions was effaced by section 17(1-C). Their Lordships have further observed that by enactment of subsection (1-B) to section 17 to the West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act, 1958, "an exclusive beneficial remedial forum was made available to all such employees in respect of terms and conditions of their employment, and therefore, under Constitutional provision of Article 212(2) all proceedings pending elsewhere abated and none could be entertained elsewhere."
5. In the case of Muhammad Latif Bhatti v. Chairman, Area Electricity Board, Gujranwala (1987 SCMF 1936) the petitioner obtained relief from the Labour Court under section 25-A of I.R.O., 1969 but in Constitution petition the learned High Court held that the petitioner having been declared 'civil servant', interference by the Labour Court was, therefore, without jurisdiction. The petitioner thereafter, moved the Service Tribunal, which also dismissed the petition of the petitioner on the ground that requirement of first proviso to section 4(1) of Service Tribunals Act, 1973 had not been satisfied. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the Service Tribunal.
6. In view of the above discussions the WAPDA employees being declared to 'be 'civil servant', the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to entertain their grievance applications and orders passed by learned Labour Court were without jurisdiction. I, therefore, need not go into merits of these cases, as it might prejudice the cases of appellants Muhammad Hassan and Atta Muhammad, if they choose to approach Service Tribunal for relief. The appeal of appellant Muhammad Hassan being Appeal No, 47/1990 and appeal of Atta Muhammad being Appeal No, 82/1990 are dismissed, whereas Appeal No, 19/1990, filed by Chairman, Area Electricity Board, Hyderabad is allowed and impugned order, dated 19-12-1989, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, VII at Sukkur is set aside.