ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned till Tuesday the hearing of review petitions filed by the federal government and the sacked employees against its judgement declaring the Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Act 2010 ultra vires of the Constitution.

A five-member larger bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Qazi Mohammad Amin and Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the review petitions.

During the course of proceedings, Justice Bandial said the court would hear other lawyers after hearing the arguments of Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan.

The AGP said he had submitted written synopsis in the case. These employees were fired under a letter dated Nov 7, 1996, from the Establishment Division.

Court to hear other lawyers after AGP’s arguments, says Justice Bandial

Justice Mansoor asked employees of how many departments had been affected by the decision of the Supreme Court?

The AGP said around 16 departments’ 16,000 employees had been affected while the Establishment Division claimed that the number of affected employees was 5,000.

He said the employees were recruited between 1993 and 1996 and fired at different times until 1999.

When Justice Bandial asked did the law entitle the employees to pension, the AGP responded that according to his opinion they would not be entitled to pension.

Justice Bandial asked whether the employees recruited under the ordinance and the Act were permanent or daily wagers. The AGP replied that most of the employees were permanent.

He said the employees had challenged their seniority in courts.

The Supreme Court issued notice to the attorney general on the petitions but it was not a notice under Article 27-A.

Justice Mansoor said the high court had not ruled on the ordinance or the Act.

Justice Bandial said issuance of a notice was a formality but the court decided the case after hearing the attorney general’s office. The Constitution empowers the apex court to deliver justice, he added.

He said the affected employees were not recruited under any procedure and the apex court in its decision had also examined the recruitment procedure. He said there should be a criterion for recruitment on government posts.

Justice Mansoor said all the employees were not fired under a letter or a government order. It was true that the employees had no role in the unconstitutional legislation, he added.

He said the restoration law could not be re-enacted as the court had ruled over the matter. Parliament could give any relief to the employees on 10 years of service, he added.

The AGP said parliament was defending the Act through the government and him (AGP).

Justice Qazi Amin asked could there be a system of governance beyond the Constitution? The government had earlier opposed the reinstatement of the employees while in the review petition it wanted to reinstate the employees, he added.

The AGP said three daughters of a sacked employee were expelled from school for non-payment of fees. He said he knew that courts took decisions based on the law, not popularity. If the same case had come up in 2010, he would have opposed the reinstatement of the employees, he added.

Upon this, Justice Sajjad said he (AGP) was acknowledging that the reinstatement law was unconstitutional.

Published in Dawn, December 14th, 2021