1994SCMR1801 (PLP)

2. The facts of this case in brief are that the appellant was serving as Subject Specialist in Government Comprehensive School, Faisalabad, when he was retired from service under section 12(ii) of Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, after having completed 25 years' service, on 26‑6‑1986. The appellant having failed to get his grievance redressed from the Departmental authorities, approached the Punjab Service Tribunal. He challenged the order of his retirement on two grounds; firstly, the appellant had not completed 25 years' service qualifying for pension, and secondly that the order of retirement had not been made in the public interest. The learned Service Tribunal had not attended to ground No. 1 but allowed the appeal on the ground that the record of the appellant was satisfactory and good. The Character Roll presented in the Court depicts that his service record was quite satisfactory/good. While allowing the appeal the Service Tribunal held that the intervening period, during which the appellant remained out of service, shall be treated as leave without pay.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that, as per Rules, a Committee has to decide the entitlement of the appellant with regard to the back benefits, therefore, the Service Tribunal should have left this matter upon the Committee for decision. He has placed reliance on F.R. 54 and section 16 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act. F.R. 54 reads as under:‑‑ "When the suspension ‑of a Government servant is held to have been unjustifiable or not wholly justifiable; or When a Government servant who has been dismissed, removed or suspended is reinstated the revising or appellate authority may grant to him for the period of his absence from duty‑‑ (a) if he is honourably acquitted, the full pay to which he would have been entitled if he had not been dismissed, removed or suspended and, by an order to be separately recorded, any allowance of which he was in receipt prior to his dismissal, removal or suspension; (b) if otherwise, such proportion of such pay and allowances as the revising or appellate authority may prescribe. In a case falling under clause (a), the period of absence from duty will be treated as a period spent on duty. In a case falling under clause (b) it will not be treated as a period spent on duty unless the revising or appellate authority so directs: Provided that the amount of arrears payable to the Government servants concerned, whether he is re‑instated as a result of a Court judgment or acceptance of his appeal by the departmental authority, shall be reduced by the amount earned by way of salary or as profit on account of his having accepted some employment or been engaged in some profitable business during the period he remained dismissed, removed or suspended, and for the determination of the said amount a committee shall be constituted consisting of two officers of the Administrative Division and a representative of the Finance Division." In the present case clause (b) would attract. The Committee shall also take into consideration whether a civil servant has earned any amount by way of salary or as profit on account of his having accepted some employment or been engaged in some profitable business during the intervening period. Similarly, according to proviso (ii) of section 16 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, where an order of removal of a civil servant has been set aside, he shall be entitled to such arrears of pay as the authority setting aside the `order may determine. In the instant case the Tribunal has not allowed the arrears of pay without assigning any reason. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has referred to comments of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which state as under:‑‑ "While hearing the case the appellant Muhammad Bashir had given his comment to forego arrears in case of his re‑instatement in service. Consequently in the last para. of the judgment dated 28‑3‑1992 it is observed that the intervening period during which the appellant remained out of service shall be treated as leave without pay." This concession of the appellant has not been incorporated in the impugned judgment of the Service Tribunal. There is also no reference that the back benefits are not allowed in view of the concession of the appellant, therefore, these comments cannot be taken into consideration. This appeal is accepted, and the case is remanded to the official respondents for deciding the matter in accordance with law. The Committee will decide the appellant's entitlement of arrears of pay and adjustment, if any, in accordance with above Rule F.R. 54 and Civil Services Laws. There shall be no order as to costs. A.A./M‑1985/S Appeal accepted.