Safir Khan Vs Secretary Finance through Ministry of Finance Islamabad and others.

Page I of4

JI]DGMENT SHEET

PESHAWAR HIGH COURT. PESHAWAR

JTJDICIAL DEPARTMENT

W.P No.2l 49-P of 2022 CM No. 1567-P of 2022- Safir Khan Vs.

Secretary Finance through Ministry of Finance Islamabad and others.

Date of hearing 24.04.2024.

Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Suliman Ali, Advocate. Respondent(s) by: Mr. Obaid Ullah Anwar, DAG, for the official respondents along with Rana Muhammad Nafees, Advocate.

,r fr rk*fr,t

JUDGMENT

*rr,r,r,r*

IJAZ All-WAR. J. The petitioner 1S seeking enforcement of certain Govemment instructions issued in the year 1977 not through the intervention of any Federal Govemment functionary but against the private bank through the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner in the instant petition claimed the following relief:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that on acceptance of this writ petition, that the respondent No.3 i.e. MCB Bank may kindly be directed:- i. To implement and follow the d tnstructions contained in the Ministry of Finance letter No.17(9)-IF,XI/77 C dated 30.11.1997.

ii. To allow and pay the aruears of all yearly increase in Pension dulY announced by the Govetnment since

1989 (The year of petitioner retirement) till date.

iii. To ensure and conJirm onward payment of the increased amount in pension, tf any and ftxation of the monthly amount of pesion after increase.

Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems appropriate in the circumstances of the case may also be granted".

Arguments heard and record perused

3.The Muslim Commerical Bank Ltd is a

banking company privatized in the year 1991, having no statutory rules governing the terms and conditions of services of its employees. The Federal Government has no controlling share in the Bank, similarly, the State Bank of Pakistan only acts as a regulator, and the recent view of the Apex Court is that even the State Bank of Pakistan has got no statutory rules of service for governing the terms and conditions of its employees.

Thus, in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan the said Bank is neither a local authority or body controlled by the Provincial or Federal Government nor it comes within the definition i of person as provided under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, thus, not amenable to the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court.

4.It is by now well settled that where there are no statutory rules governing the terms and conditions of its employees the status of such employees with the bank would become that of master and servant. Similarly, in case, such employees qualiff the status of the workmen then they can approach the Labour forum for the redressal of their grievances.

5.It is pertinent to mention here that the August Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case titled "Abdul Wahab and others Vs HBL and others" (2013 SCMR 1383) while discussing the status of the Habib Bank Limited employees has held as under:- "(b) Habib Bank Limited Staff Service Rules,7987---

----Rr. 15 & 17--Constitution of Pakistan, ArL 184(3)---Constitutional petition under Art. 1 8 4 (3 ) of the C onstitution challenging the policy decision taken by the Board of Management of Habib Bank Limited ("the Bank") by which 308 employees of the Bank were compulsorily retired early and services of 2 employees were terminated by paying them three months' dues-- -Maintainability--Contractual employees of a Bank governed by non-statutory rules--- Employees (petitioners) in question were employed by the Bank as a result of a prestibed internal process of the Bank and the letters of I their appointment clearly indicated that they ( were taken into employment on their unequivocal acceptance of the terms and conditions of employment---When employees duly accepted the offer of appointment, it culminated into a valid and a binding service contract between the parties, which for all intents and purposes was meant to govern and regulate the relationshiP

inter se between the parties-- Constitutional petitionwas held to be not maintainable in such circumstances and was accordingly dismis s ed. "

6.For the reason stated above since this Court has got no jurisdiction to interfere with the internal affairs of private entities nor the MCB comes within the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court for the purpose of enforcing the terms and conditions of its employees, as such, this petition is held as not maintainable, it accordingly dismissed along with CM.

Announced.

Dated. 24.04.2024.

Senior

I

Puisne Judge

(A,ntr Shehzad) * tr

(DB)Hon'ble Mr. tustice Iiaz Amyar and Hon'ble Mn luilice Shahtd Khan