' These are appeals against the decision dated 20-6-1977 of Punjab Labour Court, No, 9, Multan.
2. Sardar Khan, Mohammad Ishaq Mohammad Hayat, Abdul Qadir and Maqsood Khan, appellants, who were employed as drivers in Government Transport Service, Multan on reaching the age of superannuation 1. e. 55 years, were given one year's extension with effect from 1-7-1975. After that they were retired from service at the age of 56 years with effect from 30.6-1976 after expiry of extended period. They were also sanctioned one month's L. P. R. With effect from 1-6-1976. All the appellants challenged the orders of their retirement by way of separate petitions under section 25- A of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 before the Labour Court, which dismissed the same vide decisions under appeals.
3. Aggrieved by the above decisions, Sardar Khan Mohammad Ishaq, Mohammad Hayat, Abdul Qadir and Maqsood Khan, appellants have preferred these appeals. Since the point of law, involved in all these 'appeals is the same, they will be disposed of together by one judgment.
4. The relevant rules applicable in these cues are Rules, 33(1) and 33(2) of Punjab Road Transport Board Service Rules, 1959. Rule 33(1) reads as under :- "Date of compulsory retirement of a Board employee shall be the dale on which be attains 60th birthday."
' Rule 33(2) reads as under :- "Notwithstanding the provision made in the preceding Rule, the competent authority may review the case of a Corporation's employee when he is about to complete 25 years of service or when he is about to complete 55th year of age, in order to satisfy itself of that person's further usefulness to the Corporation's service and if the competent authority is not so satisfied, it may direct the compulsory retirement of the Corporation's employee from service upon his completion of 25 years service or 55th year of age. Provided that in the case of an employee who joined service before 20- 9-1961, the review of his age shall be made only once when he is about 58th year of his age."
5. Rule 33(1) was amended on 19-7.1972 as a result of which, the age of retirement was reduced to 55 years from 60 years. After that the ago of superannuation was again raised to 58 years. On 14- 6.1974 the Road Transport Board in its 18th meeting took the following decision :- "(a) The competent authority himself or through a Committee constituted by him will review the case of a Board employee to determine his further suitability/retention or otherwise when :-
(1) The employee is about to complete 25 years service, or (ii) When the employee is about to complete 55 years of age.
(b) Continuation beyond 25 years of service 55 years of age will be governed by the recommendations of the competent authority/ Committee who may recommend :-
(i) Yearly/two yearly/three yearly extension, as the case may be and the extension will be further reviewed in a similar manner, or
(ii) the retirement of the employee if he is not considered suitable/fit for further employment."
6. Thus from the above it is clear that the age of superannuation was again reduced to 55 years in the above meeting of the Board. It would follow from the above that the Board had decided to review the cases of the Board employees to determine their further retention in service on two stages, firstly when an employee completes 25 years of service and secondly, when he completes 55 years of age. As a result of such review if the Reviewing authority/Committee decided that an employee could not be retained in service after completing one of the stages mentioned above, his retirement could be ordered.
7. The learned Representative for the appellants contended that the reduction of age of superannuation from 58 years to 55 years adversely affected the terms and conditions of service of the employees, which could! Not have been done without the prior permission of the Labour Court, because Industrial Dispute No, 23 of 1973 was pending and as such it was in violation of section 47(1) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. This contention has great force and I, accordingly, accept the appeals, set aside the decisions of the Labour Court and direct that the appellants be re-instated with back benefits and be kept in service till they reach the age of 58 years.