' This judgment shall dispose of the above captioned four appeals as common questions of law and facts are involved therein for determination by this Tribunal.
2. The facts relevant for the disposal of these appeals are that the appellants were employed in the Pakistan Railways. They being aggrieved of the different office orders of the Railways Administration served grievance notices on the employer as required under the law but their efforts did not yield any result. Therefore, they approached the Labour Court, Peshawar through separate grievance petitions under section 25-A, of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (to be called the Ordinance hereinafter) for the reversal of the impugned orders with consequential benefits. The learned Labour Court, while relying upon the provision of section 2-A, of the Service Tribunal Act, 1973 (hereinafter to be called the Act) dismissed the two grievance petitions as having abated, while the other two grievance petitions were adjourned sine die and the parties were directed to seek further clarification in respect of the forum of adjudication from the Labour Appellate Tribunal vide impugned orders, dated 1-10-1997 and 25-10-1997 respectively.
3. That the appellants feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of the learned Labour Court, have invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal-through - appeals under section 37(3) of the Ordinance and prayed that the impugned orders of the learned Labour Court be set aside and the cases be remanded to him for decision on merits.
4. Both the learned counsel for the parties were heard in support of their respective viewpoints and record was also perused in the light of their submissions..
5. It was argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that Pakistan Railways is functioning as a Department of the Federal Government and the same does not fall under any of the categories enumerated in the newly added section 2-A, of the Act, therefore, the said provision would have no application to the appellants cases. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellants are workmen under the Factory Act, 1934 and the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 and they have specifically been excluded from the definition of a Civil Servant as given in section 2(iii) of the Civil Servant Act, 1973. It was next argued that the appellants were performing manual and clerical works. They had no power to hire and fire nor they were supervising the work and conduct of others employees. They were also not engaged in matter connected with the administration of State, therefore, they could seek remedy before the learned Labour Court for the redressal of their grievances.
6. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the contention submitted that the appellants would be deemed to be Civil Servants by virtue of the provisions of newly added section 2-A for the purpose of the Act, therefore, the learned Labour Court has rightly dismissed their grievance petition as having abated.
7. The sole point involved for determination by this Tribunal is whether the respondents Department falls within the purview of the newly added section 2-A of the Act or not. For this purpose, it would be appropriate to reproduce herein the newly added section 2-A of the Act and the definition of a Civil Servant as defined in the Civil Servant Act, 1973.
' Section 2-A. "2-A ' Service under certain corporation, etc., to be service of Pakistan.
' Service under any authority, corporation, body or organization established by or under a Federal law or which is owned or in which the Federal Government or in which the Federal Government has a controlling share or interest is hereby declared to be service of Pakistan and every person holding a post under such authority, corporation, body or organization shall be deemed to be a civil servant for the purposes of this Act.
' Section 2. 'Civil Servant' means a person who is a member of an All Pakistan Service or of a civil service of the Federation, or who holds a Civil Post in connection which the affairs of the Federation, including any such post connected with defence, but does not include:--
(i) . ........................... (ii)..............................................
(iii) A person who is a "worker" or "workman" as defined in the Factories Act, 1934 (XXV of 1934) or the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 (VIII of 1923).
8. Thus, it is clear from the above quoted law that service under any authority, corporation, body or organization established or controlled by a Federal Government or in which Federal Government has a controlling share would be a service of Pakistan and every person holding a post under said authority, corporation, body or organization would be deemed to be Civil Service for the purpose of Act and the persons who are workmen within the meaning as given in the Factories Act and/or Workmen's Compensation Act who have already been excluded from the application of Civil Servant Act would not be effected by the newly added amendment and they would remain as workers/workmen under the labour laws and as such could invoke the jurisdiction of the Labour Court for the settlement of disputes between the employer and the workmen. Pakistan Railways is functioning as a Department of the Federal Government which cannot be said to be an Authority, Corporation, body or Organization of the Federal Government as it is exclusively owned and controlled by the Federal Government through the Ministry of Railways, therefore, section 2-A, would not apply to the Railways employees who fall within the definition of workmen. The question whether the appellant are workmen or not under the labour laws still require determination by the Labour Court, who after recording of evidence of the parties should determine the status of the appellants.
9. It is pertinent to mention here that in Appeals Nos,29 of 1997 and 30 of 1997 orders, dated 25-10- 1997 have been impugned which are self-contradictory and also in clash with the orders impugned in Appeals Nos,27 and 28 of 1997. On the one hand it was observed that the pending cases have abated under the new amendment and on the other, cases were adjourned sine die and the parties were directed to seek further clarification in respect of the forum of adjudication from the Labour Appellate Tribunal. In so far as latter part of the order is concerned these appeals are neither competent nor maintaining as the impugned orders of the learned Labour Court were not appealable under section 37(3) of the Ordinance, which provides that any party aggrieved by an award given under subsection (1) of section 37 or a decision given under section 25-A may prefer an appeal before the Labour Appellate Tribunal, whereas the impugned orders are not decisions and do not fall under any of the kind mentioned above, however, to meet the ends of justice, these appeals are converted into revisions and disposed of as such, and the office is directed to make necessary entries in the relevant register.
The nutshell of the above discussion is that the instant appeals/revisions are accepted and the impugned orders of the learned Trial Court, dated 1-10-1997 and 25-10-1997 respectively are set aside and the cases are remanded to him for decision on merits in accordance with law. Parties are left to bear their own costs.