ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court docket of Pakistan Wednesday directed the Khyber Pakhtunkhawa (KP) authorities to take motion in opposition to officers who filed an enchantment in opposition to the Service Tribunal choice to revive two staff of the schooling division after the stipulated time had handed.

A two-member bench of the apex court docket headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmad carried out listening to of the enchantment in opposition to the KP Service Tribunal.

The apex court docket expressed its annoyance over KP officers’ lack of ability to file the enchantment in opposition to the Service Tribunal inside time. The Chief Justice mentioned that the KP Training Division deliberately filed the enchantment late. He added that that is irresponsible habits from the division which is insupportable.

Through the listening to, the KP extra advocate common (AAG) knowledgeable the bench that the KP Health Regulation Committee examines the instances fortnightly and decides whether or not to file an enchantment in opposition to the choice of Tribunal and Excessive Court docket or not.

Justice Gulzar mentioned that just about day by day they heard instances in opposition to the KP authorities. He mentioned that the involved committee ought to monitor the instances often. He additionally mentioned, “We are not advising them, but it should look into the matter regularly.”

The bench maintained the order of KP Service Tribunal, which restored the 2 feminine staff of the KP Training Division. The tribunal had restored Rukhsana Begum and Ms Azmat into service. The schooling division had dismissed each the women for as they weren’t appointed in accordance with the laid down standards.

In the meantime, the identical bench of the apex court docket additionally put aside the Service Tribunal choice to pay pension to an worker of KP Training division who remained absent from service for 18 years.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan famous that Muhammad Riaz remained absent from the service for 18 years. He questioned how an worker who remained absent for such a protracted interval may very well be restored to the service.

The appellant lawyer contented that his consumer remained in service for 14 years due to this fact he’s entitled for pension and the advantages. The AAG KP mentioned that for compelled retirement from service the interval is 25 years.

The apex court docket accepted the KP authorities enchantment and declared the choice of provincial tribunal null and void.