Service matters: Department must decide appeal in 90 days

The top court has held that a service tribunal cannot refer a service matter back to a departmental authority if the said authority has already failed to decide it within a period of 90 days.

“…Once [an] appeal, application of review or representation…of a civil servant is not decided by the departmental authority within a period of 90 days and he has elected to approach the tribunal through preferring an appeal after [the] lapse of that period, then his appeal has to be decided on merits…

“…The tribunal cannot dispose of that appeal by issuing direction to the departmental authority to decide the appeal, application for review or representation of the appellant, because the said remedy already stands exhausted by virtue of the lapse of time,” read a five-page order.

A division bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, issued the verdict while hearing a service matter. Justice Shah authored the written order.

Then bench noted that Article 212 of the Constitution authorised the appropriate legislature to provide for establishing administrative tribunals to exercise exclusive jurisdiction relating to matters pertaining to the terms and conditions of the “persons in the service of Pakistan”.

“Under the said constitutional provision, the jurisdiction of the regular courts stands barred to entertain such matters,” the order added.

It said the purpose and object of establishing an administrative service tribunal was to keep the matters of persons in the service of Pakistan out of the regular courts to provide them with a more efficient and specialised forum for the speedy resolution of the disputes arising from the terms and conditions of their jobs.

The judgment noted that an efficient dispute resolution system within the civil bureaucracy was a key to effective administration.

“The tribunals strive to provide an efficient and timely resolution of disputes. They enjoy specialised knowledge and expertise in public service matters [that] can lead to quicker and more accurate decision-making. The tribunals provide an accessible, fair, and efficient system for resolving disputes arising from public service employment,” the SC observed in its verdict.

“They [tribunals] ensure consistency and transparency, and maintain high standards in the public service sector. Additionally, efficient dispute resolution of civil servants through service tribunals is important for maintaining employee morale and productivity, enhancing government credibility, strengthening institutional capacity, reducing the burden on the judiciary and preventing the escalation of conflicts,” it added.

“These factors collectively contribute to better governance and administration within the government. Thus, an efficient dispute settlement mechanism through an administrative service tribunal is necessary for civil servants to maintain public trust in the civil service, and ultimately contributes to the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the government,” the judgment read.

The court also observed that as per Section 4 of the Act, the right to prefer an appeal to the tribunal could be invoked subject to the fulfilment of two pre-conditions: in the first scenario, in case a departmental appeal, review or representation was provided under the law, no appeal to the tribunal shall lie unless such a remedy was availed by the aggrieved civil servant.

The second scenario that the SC pointed out was that if the period of 90 days had elapsed since the departmental appeal, review or representation had been preferred.

“Therefore, if the departmental appeal, review or representation of a civil servant is not decided within a period of 90 days, the aggrieved civil servant need not endlessly wait for the decision of the departmental appeal, review or representation and can straight away approach the tribunal by filing an appeal for the redressal of his grievance,” the verdict read.

“The act encourages a civil servant to first avail the remedy of departmental appeal, review or representation so that the matter can best be decided at the departmental level.

“However, if no progress is made on such departmental remedy within 90 days, the act provides the civil servant with a higher remedy in the shape of an appeal before the tribunal to agitate his grievance.”

The court noted that when the aggrieved civil servant availed the higher remedy of appeal before the tribunal after the lapse of the prescribed period of 90 days, the departmental remedy of appeal, review or representation lost its significance and automatically came to an end.

“Once the matter is brought before the tribunal in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the act, the departmental remedy stands exhausted. Under Section 5 of the act, the tribunal on appeal can only confirm, set aside, vary or modify the order appealed against.

“The tribunal has no power under the act to direct the departmental authorities to decide the departmental appeal, application for review or representation of the civil servant, which remained undecided for a period of 90 days,” the verdict said.