livelawpk.com - Writ Petition against OGDCL is not Maintainable

Writ Petition against OGDCL is not Maintainable due to the Non-Statutory Nature of the Employment Rules --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

5 months, 3 weeks
202

Writ Petition against OGDCL is not Maintainable due to the Non-Statutory Nature of the Employment Rules --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

Islamabad 28-06-2024: The Islamabad High Court has dismissed a writ petition, challenging his dismissal from service by the Oil and Gas Development Company Limited (OGDCL). The petition, [W.P.No.3076 of 2018], was adjudicated by Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, who ruled that the petition was not maintainable due to the non-statutory nature of the employment rules governing the petitioner’s service.

The petitioner was appointed as a Senior Security Officer in OGDCL in 2005. Disciplinary proceedings against him began in 2013, leading to his compulsory retirement in 2014. The petitioner successfully challenged this decision, resulting in the matter being reopened. In 2018, fresh disciplinary proceedings culminated in his removal from service, prompting him to file the current writ petition.

The petitioner argued that the inquiry committee, which led to his removal, was improperly constituted, as it was initiated by an Acting Manager instead of a Manager. He contended that the disciplinary process was flawed and his removal was unjust.

Conversely, OGDCL’s counsel contended that the terms of the petitioner’s service were governed by the Oil and Gas Development Company Limited Employees’ Service Rules, 2002, which are non-statutory. They argued that, under established legal precedents, disputes involving non-statutory service terms fall under the master-servant rule and cannot be addressed through constitutional writ jurisdiction.

Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, after hearing the contentions, agreed with OGDCL’s stance. He noted that the petitioner’s employment terms were indeed governed by non-statutory rules. Citing various precedents, the judge emphasized that employees governed by non-statutory service rules cannot seek relief through writ petitions.

The Court concluded that since the petitioner’s service terms were non-statutory, the writ petition was not maintainable, regardless of the fact that his previous writ petitions had been allowed by the Court.

The Islamabad High Court dismissed the writ petition, advising the petitioner to seek redressal through a Court of competent jurisdiction. This decision reinforces the principle that disputes regarding non-statutory service terms must be addressed through appropriate legal channels rather than constitutional writ jurisdiction.

The ruling underscores the legal boundaries within which employees of non-statutory organizations can seek remedies for grievances related to their service conditions.