ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC), on Thursday, questioned whether the benefit of working for 10 years could be extended to the sacked employees of the government and semi-autonomous bodies.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah questioned could the benefit of working for 10 years be extended to the employees who were sacked, rightly or wrongly from the government and semi-autonomous organisations, in the light of the SC’s judgment.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial, while heading a five-judge larger bench, said that according to the judgment under review, it seemed that the benefit accrued to be beneficiaries ceased to the employees who had served the government and the semi-autonomous bodies for 12 years.

The bench heard the review petitions of the federal government and the sacked employees against the apex court’s judgment.

Justice Mushir Alam, before his retirement (August 17, 2021), delivered the judgment declaring the Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Act, 2010, ultra vires. It also said the effect of such a declaration is that any/all the benefits accrued to be beneficiaries are to be ceased with immediate effect. “The beneficiaries of the Act, 2010, who are still in service, will go back to their previous positions, i.e., to date when the operation of the Act 2010 has taken effect,” the judgment further said.

Justice Bandial said they would also examine what is the status of employees restored through Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Ordinance, 2009, because could the workers reinstated under it remain in their jobs when the Ordinance lapsed.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah stated that restoration of the sacked workers through ordinance is undemocratic, adding, then every government would recruit people in the government and the semi-autonomous bodies through ordinances. He observed that the parliament is supreme in the democratic system.

Lawyer Raza Rabbani argued that in the present government, the laws are made through ordinances. He contended that he would produce documents with regard to Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Act, 2010, adding no clause of the Act is against the fundamental rights.

Hamid Khan Advocate, representing 1,100 sacked employees of the Sui Southern Gas Pipeline Limited (SNGPL), argued that a person inducted in the SNGPL at the age of 19 years is now 40-year-old. He said that his clients belong to Sindh and Balochistan, who were appointed in 1996 and were removed from service in 1997 and 1999.

He said that his clients were regularised and were reinstated through the Federal Service Tribunal (FST)’s order. The department then approached the apex court against the FST’s order.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah asked him to show the court’s decisions. The counsel replied that the FST’s verdict is not on record.

Hamid further informed that the employees had approached the Sindh and Balochistan High Courts for the implementation of the FST’s order. The BHC, in view of the FST’s verdict, ordered for the restoration of the employees, while the Sindh High Court gave them opportunity that if they wanted to be reinstated under the Ordinance 2009 then they avail it.

The lawyer said the SNGPL employees agreed to be restored under the Ordinance, 2009.

Justice Bandial said they would examine how the SNGPL employees were reinstated, adding Ordinance, Act and the High Courts’ orders have different implication.

The case was adjourned until December 13.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2021