mr. justice tassaduq hussain jillani mr. justice nasir-ul-mulk mr ...

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 39/2010, 1150/2010, 1162/2010, 142-K/2009, 177-
K/2010, 178-K/2010, 228-K/2010, 57-K/2011, 63-K/2011, 65-K/2011, 66-
K/2011, 83-K/2011, 91-K/2011, 135-K/2011, 136-K/2011, 137-K/2011, 188-
K/2011, 232-K/2011, 75-K/2012 AND 82-K/2012
30
Ali Brohi (2010 PSC 1392) and Civil Aviation
Authority through Director General v. Javed
Ahmad (2009 SCMR 956)?
28. For a better appreciation of the question framed, it
would be pertinent to comprehend the ambit and scope of the
Ordinance 2000 and its various provisions. It has not been
disputed before this Court that the appellants are statutory bodies
within the meaning of section 2 of the Ordinance and that is why
all the respondent-employees were proceeded against under the
said law except those of NED University and regarding that the
High Court of Sindh vide the impugned judgment had observed
that those employees too ought to have been dealt with under the
said Ordinance. To discern that the Ordinance 2000 has an
overriding effect a reference to certain provisions at this stage
would be in order. Section 1(4) of the Ordinance 2000 stipulates
that “it shall apply to persons in Government service and corporation
service.” The expression “person in corporation service” has been
defined in section 2(c) which reads as under:-
“2. Definitions.--- ----
(a)-----
(aa) ------
(b)------
(c)'person in corporation service' means
every person in the employment of a
corporation, corporate body, authority,
statutory body or other organization or
institutions set up, established, owned,
managed or controlled by the Federal
Government, or by or under any law for the
time being in force or a body or organization
in which the Federal Government has a
controlling share or interest and includes