2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Ch. HAIDER ALI Versus DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION, WASA
| Citation | 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Umar Ata Bandial, J |
| Parties | Ch. HAIDER ALI Versus DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION, WASA |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Umar Ata Bandial, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Ch. HAIDER ALI Versus DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION, WASA). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Akram Javed for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Pendency of criminal proceedings against civil servant
Withholding of pension and gratuity
Criminal proceedings were pending against petitioner for the last 10 years and pension and gratuity of petitioner were being withheld on account of pendency of said criminal proceedings; though Departmental proceedings in respect of the same charge were dropped against petitioner
Law did not contemplate a retired government servant to be deprived of his retirement benefits endlessly
Department had concluded its own proceedings against petitioner. in his favour
Department ought to have brought such finding on the record of the Special Judge Anti-Corruption before whom prosecution was under adjudication for last 10 years
Punjab Civil Servants Pension Rules, 1963 were silent with respect to consequence of a pending third party prosecution of a retired civil servant to receive pensionary dues
Proceedings being pending against civil servant before Judge Anti-Corruption, no direction was issued by the department in that regard--Petitioner, however, would be at liberty to approach High Court after four months, if by such time, Authority, who was so directed, would not co-operate to get criminal case against petitioner concluded in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.
Learned counsel submits that the criminal prosecution of F.I.R. No.44 of 1996 registered on 13-6-1996 with the DACE, Punjab at Lahore has been pending for the last 10 years without conclusion. According to the parawaise comments the pension and gratuity of the petitioner are being withheld on account of the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case although departmental proceedings in respect of the same charge were dropped against the petitioner on 12-10-2004.
2. The law does not contemplate a retired Government servant to be deprived of his retirement benefits endlessly. The department has concluded its own proceedings against the petitioner in his favour. It should bring such findings on the record of the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption before whom the prosecution under the aforesaid F.I.R. is under adjudication for last 10 years. As the Punjab Civil Servants Pension Rules are silent with respect to the consequence of a pending third party prosecution of a retired civil servant on his entitlement to receive pensionary dues and in this case proceedings are pending against him before learned Judge Anti-Corruption, therefore, no direction is presently issued in this regard.
3. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court after four months if by such time the respondent, who is so directed, does not cooperate to get the criminal case against the petitioner concluded in accordance with law. This petition is disposed of. H.B.T./H-18/L Order accordingly.