' SH. RIAZ AHMAD, J.---This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment dated 2- 6-1996 delivered by the Federal Service Tribunal whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent calling in question his dismissal from service vide order dated 28-11-1995 was partly allowed, the dismissal order was set aside and the respondent was reinstated in service. However, the Tribunal allowed the department to proceed against the respondent afresh on the same charges in accordance with the provisions of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 (hereinafter called the Rules of 1973).
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent was serving in the Pakistan Rangers as Deputy Superintendent Rangers at Lahore. On bifurcation of Pakistan Rangers, he was transferred to Sindh.
While serving at Lahore, he remained posted in the Ordnance Branch where he was entrusted with the duty of procurement of stores etc. And payments therefor. While serving in Sindh, he was charge-sheeted by the Director-General, Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, respondent No, 2 on the following grounds:--
(i) As a member of the force at Lahore during the period between 16-7-1991 to 15-11-1993 he improperly signed documents resulting in incorrect payment of Rs,74,00,000 (Rupees seventy-four lac only).
(ii) During the aforesaid period, he withheld the information regarding receipt of a cheque for Rs,22,22,000 (Rupees twenty-two lac and twenty-two thousand only), which amount was placed at the disposal of the Rangers for purchase of boats and launches and the said amount could not be spent on the purchase of said items.
3. The respondent denied the charges and submitted a reply. As against charge No, 1, the respondent stated that he had checked and attested the list of signal equipment in accordance with the contract deed executed between the Director-General, Headquarters (Punjab), Lahore and M/s. Micro Ltd., Lahore and the same was sent to the Board of Officers responsible for the inspection of the store comprising of a Lt.-Colonel, a Major and a Captain. According to the respondent, the said Board had inspected the store and found the same in accordance with the list and on the receipt of the inspection note duly signed by the Board of Officers, a bill was prepared, which was signed by the then ADDS, HQ PR (Pb.), Lahore. The respondent further submitted that stock entry was also made by the Storeman and then it was submitted to the A.-G. Office for payment. On receipt of cheque from the A.-G. Office, the same was deposited in the Bank by the said firm in their own account opened by them on the directive of the Pakistan Rangers, Punjab and in lieu of this payment the firm deposited the call deposit with the ADDS, HQ (Pb.), with different denominations.
According to the respondent, the payment was made by Brig. Shamsuddin to the said firm. The respondent thus submitted that, the charge was baseless. Charge No, 2 was also denied and it was stated that after receipt of the cheque the same was deposited with the National Bank of Pakistan, Airport Branch in the account opened by the Director-General, Headquarters, Pakistan Rangers, Lahore and it was in the knowledge of all the officers that the amount had been received and deposited in the Bank. The respondent submitted that he was not responsible for the purchase of the items and the disbursement or expenditure of the amount against the purchases.
4. The competent Authority found the reply unsatisfactory, and thus, vide order dated 28-11-1995 the respondent was dismissed from service. The respondent invoked jurisdiction of the Tribunal, which allowed the appeal vide judgment impugned. Leave was granted to consider whether the Rules of 1973 were applicable to the employees of the Pakistan Rangers.
5. In support of this appeal, the learned Deputy Attorney-General has placed reliance on the amendment of section 1 of the West Pakistan Rangers Ordinance (No, XIV of 1959) by virtue of Pakistan Rangers (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1985). Through the said amendment in section 1, after subsection (2), following new subsection was added:- "The provisions of this Ordinance and the Rules made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Servants Act, 1973 (LXXI of 1973) and the Rules made thereunder."
' On the basis of this amendment, it was vehemently argued that since the Civil Servants Act, 1973, was not applicable, therefore, the respondent was not a civil servant, hence the Rules of 1973 were not applicable, and therefore, the judgment impugned delivered by the Tribunal was erroneous.
6. To further substantiate his argument, reliance was placed by the learned Deputy Attorney- General on the judgment reported as Force Commander, Airport Security Force, Karachi and others v. Haji Muhammad Rashid and another (1996 SCM R 1614). We have carefully gone through this judgment, but it has no applicability to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the said judgment, this Court had interpreted the provisions of Airports Security Act (LXXVII of 1975). The said Act was amended and sections 7-A to 7-G were inserted to the Act by virtue of the Airports Security Force (Amendment) Ordinance (XXXV of 1984). Section 7-A of the said Act was further amended by Ordinance No, XLIV of 1993. In addition thereto, the Airports Security Force (Discipline) Rules, 1973 and the Airports Security Force (Service) Rules, 1978 were also considered and the Airports Security Force Rules, 1974 as well as the provisions of the Pakistan Army Act and the rules framed thereunder and particularly Rules 9, 9-A and 9-B were also looked into. After elaborate discussion of the various provisions referred to above, this Court came to the conclusion that the status of the persons working in the Airports Security Force was that of a civil servant and the said status had not been changed despite the fact that Pakistan Army Act, 1952 and the Pakistan Army Act Rules, 1954 had been competently made applicable to such persons. This Court upheld the status of the persons working in the Airports Security Force as civil servants on account of the fact that provisions of Rules, 9, 9-A and 9-B of the Pakistan Army Act Rules, 1954 were not applicable to such persons by virtue of S.R.O. No, 213(KE)93, dated 9-12-1993. This Court further came to the conclusion that since provisions of Rules 9-A and 9-B of the Pakistan Army Act Rules, 1954 had not been made applicable to the employees of the Airports Security Force, therefore, the Rules of 1973 would continue to apply to the employees of the said Force till such time that above S.R.O. Was rescinded or some special rules covering the subject were framed under Act No, LXXVII of 1975 or the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.
7. It is obvious that the above judgment relied upon by the learned Deputy Attorney-General has no relevance to the facts of this case. No doubt by virtue of amendment in section 1 of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance it has been laid down that the provisions of the Ordinance and the Rules made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Servants Act, 1973 and the rules made thereunder. In the light of this amendment, it is obvious that in view of any conflict between the Civil Servants Act, 1973 and the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance, 1959, the provisions of the latter would prevail over the provisions of the former. It is further pertinent to mention that if the Rules have been framed touching any subject under the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance, then the same would be applicable to the exclusion of other rules. We have noticed that in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (2) of section 21 of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance, 1959, the Governor of West Pakistan was pleased to make rules known as Pakistan Rangers (Efficiency, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967 vide Notification No, (4)/59/Vol., dated 13-10-1967. These rules were further amended on 9-4-1985 and 4-7-1985 vide two different Notifications. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 1 reads as under:- "They shall apply to all members of the Pakistan Rangers except the members of Armed Forces on deputation to Pakistan Rangers and holders of such posts therein as may be specified in this behalf by Government from time to time by notification in the official Gazette."
' Rule 2 defines ' appellate Authority', 'competent Authority', 'Commandant', 'defaulter', 'member of the Force' and 'Officer Commanding' etc. Rule 3 lays down the classification of penalties into major and minor. Under rule 3(c),penalty can also be imposed summarily. Similarly, under sub-rule (2) of rule 3, discharge of certain categories of employees has also been provided for. Under rule 4, procedure for summary award of punishment has been provided. Under rule 14, manner of suspension has been laid down. Under rule 15, an appeal lies against the penalty. Under rule 18, revision petition lies but such revision would be incompetent where the Appellate Authority is the Federal Government. Under the said rule, remedy of review has also been provided. In addition to these remedies, under rule 20, mercy petition is also maintainable. The other rules pertain to the procedure. Perusal of these rules clearly shows that they are all embracing, and therefore, under the amendment of section 1 of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance, these rules would prevail over the Rules of 1973. The Pakistan Rangers Ordinance was promulgated to constitute a force called the Pakistan Rangers for the protection of and maintenance of order in the border areas. Since with regard to the status of the members of the force the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance is silent, therefore, it can be safely said that the employees of the Pakistan Rangers will be deemed to be civil servants as they are performing duties in connection with affairs of the Federation and hence under the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, an appeal by a member of the Pakistan Rangers regarding a matter relating to terms and conditions of his service is competent before the Federal Service Tribunal. The cases of the employees of the Pakistan Rangers would be governed by the Pakistan Rangers (Efficiency, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967 in view of the overriding provision contained in amended section 1 C of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance. However, it may be noted that the aforesaid amendment has not excluded the applicability of the Civil Servants Act as far as definition of a civil servant is concerned, but it only suggests that in case of conflict between the provisions of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance as also the rules framed thereunder and the provisions of the Civil Servants Act as well as the Rules made thereunder, the former shall prevail.
8. Unfortunately, this aspect of the case escaped the notice of the Federal Service Tribunal while deciding the appeal preferred by the respondent in the present case. Since the appeal was decided on the touchstone of the provisions of the Civil Servants Act and the rules made thereunder and not on merits in accordance with the provisions of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance and the Rules framed thereunder, namely, Pakistan Rangers (Efficiency, Discipline and Appeal)
Rules, 1967, the order impugned is erroneous in law. We would, therefore, remand the appeal to the Federal Service Tribunal to decide the controversy in the light of the provisions of the Pakistan Rangers Ordinance and the Pakistan Rangers (Efficiency, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.