1. ' We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have also gone through the impugned judgment, dated 9-12-2000 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad. It is noteworthy that the Service Tribunal had based its judgment on the findings of Presiding Officer Labour Court recorded while disposing of application under section 25-A of the I.R.O., 1969 filed by the respondent, the order of the Criminal Court acquitting the respondent-employee from the criminal charge has also been considered as one of the factor for his reinstatement. It is well-settled that the departmental proceedings are different and distinct from the criminal charge which if has been levelled simultaneously against an employee. Likewise the Tribunal may have not taken into consideration the findings recorded in favour of the respondent by the Labour Court because after the amendment in the Civil Servants Act by means of section 2-A for the purpose of the Service Tribunal the respondent employee had been treated to be a civil servant with a right to approach Service Tribunal for his redressal of grievance. Therefore, the Service Tribunal will examine his case independently on the basis of material collected during the departmental inquiry including show- cause notice and Inquiry Report etc., instead of basing its decision on the finding of a forum which firstly had no jurisdiction to decide the case secondly any finding recorded by the criminal Court regarding criminal charges against an employee arising out of the same transaction because no conclusion drawn in this behalf by a Criminal Court will have any bearing on the departmental proceedings which ought to have decided independently. It may be noted that in fact impugned orders have not been passed by the Service Tribunal by applying its judicial mind and had disposed of the appeals in a mechanical manner just observing that as Presiding Officer of Labour Court had recorded finding in favour of the respondent and the Criminal Court has also acquitted him of the charge, therefore, he is ordered to be reinstated. Such findings, however, are not sustainable in law thus deserves interference by this Court.
2. ' As a result of above discussion, these petitions, are converted into appeals and allowed. Both the cases are remanded to the Federal Service for decision of the appeals expeditiously as far as possible within a period of three months preferably. No order as to costs.