Key facts
- Court
- Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi
- Case no.
- Service Appeal No. 24 of 2025
- Bench
- Justice (R) Sadiq Hussain Bhatti (Chairman), Tariq Mehmood Khoso (Member) and Shahid Abdul Salam Khan (Member)
- Date of decision
- 24 April 2025
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed in limine as time-barred; condonation of delay refused.
- Counsel
- Ms. Sana Junjhi, advocate for the appellant
- We acted for
- The appellant (language teacher)
Personal details such as CNIC numbers, phone numbers, home addresses and FIR numbers are redacted in the PDF.
Background
The appellant was a language teacher at a government girls' school in District Tando Muhammad Khan, under the School Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh. A show-cause notice dated 15.12.2022 was issued to her on the allegation of absence from duty, and she was removed from service by order dated 22.03.2023.
She challenged the removal through an undated departmental appeal, which was rejected on 24.07.2024. On 28.08.2024 she filed a second departmental appeal to the Chief Secretary, which was held not maintainable on 15.04.2025. She then filed a service appeal with an application for condonation of delay.
Her grounds
She argued that no final show-cause notice was issued and no regular inquiry was held under the Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973. She also pointed to school closures during COVID-19, and said she had been working at the school and drawing her salary, but a biometric attendance mix-up had shown her as absent.
Issue before the Tribunal
The preliminary question was limitation: was the service appeal filed within time, and if not, should the delay be condoned?
The Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal held that time ran from the rejection of her departmental appeal on 24.07.2024. She should have filed her service appeal within 30 days of that order. A second departmental appeal, which the law does not provide for, does not extend the limitation period; the Tribunal relied on a Supreme Court decision reported in 2004 SCMR 497. It also held that ignorance of the law is not a ground for condoning delay, and found no sufficient cause to condone it. Because the appeal failed on limitation, the Tribunal did not decide her arguments on the merits.
Outcome
The appeal was dismissed in limine (at the admission stage) as barred by limitation.
Why it matters
This decision is a reminder that the timetable for a service appeal is strict. Once the departmental appeal is decided, the clock runs from that decision. Writing again to a higher authority, such as the Chief Secretary, does not stop it. Even a case with substantial grounds on the merits, such as a missing inquiry or disputed attendance records, may never be heard if the service appeal is filed late. Civil servants should take advice as soon as a departmental appeal is rejected.
Frequently asked questions
Facing a similar service matter?
Speak to our service law advocates. Call or WhatsApp +92 308 2254647 (Monday to Saturday, 11:00 am to 7:30 pm), or send an enquiry through our contact page.
This page is a plain-English summary of a reported decision, prepared from the judgment itself. It is general information, not legal advice, and every case depends on its own facts. The summary does not add to or interpret the judgment; please refer to the full text (PDF) for the court's exact words.