PLC(CS) 2007

2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

CHAIRMAN PAC BOARD, KAMRA and 3 others Versus AZHAR HUSSAIN

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition No.3095 of 2003, decided on 23rd September, 2005.
Honorable Judges
Javed Iqbal, Mian Shakirullah Jan and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Javed Iqbal, Mian Shakirullah Jan and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ
Parties CHAIRMAN PAC BOARD, KAMRA and 3 others Versus AZHAR HUSSAIN
Primary Law Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 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 Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal, Mian Shakirullah Jan and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (CHAIRMAN PAC BOARD, KAMRA and 3 others Versus AZHAR HUSSAIN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)

Representation

  • Raja Muhammad Irshad, D.A.-G. and Ch. Muhammad Akram, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
  • Ch. Afrasiab Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing: 23rd September, 2005.
  • 3. We have heard the learned Deputy Attorney-General on behalf of Chairman PAC Board Kamra, learned Advocate Supreme Court for caveater, scanned the entire record and perused the judgment impugned. We are inclined to grant leave on the following points:

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 11-9-2003 of Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No.697(R)CS of 2000) .

S. 4

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212 (3)

Advance increments, grant of

Principles

Civil servant after his retirement from Pakistan Air Force was re-employed

Authorities declined two advance increments to the civil servant

Service Tribunal allowed the appeal of civil servant and directed the authorities that the civil servant was entitled to continuation of advance increments after he was re employed

Validity

Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether duplicate benefit of advance increments could be availed twice i.e. in the former service and subsequent service; whether merger of two advance increments granted to civil servant in his substantive pay and pension would make him further entitled to obtain two advance increments again front his subsequent employment; whether instructions as contained in Establishment Division O.M. 10/52/95/R-2, dated 18-7-1996, Finance Division (Reg. Wing) O.M. No.F-5(4)R-3/96, dated 16-4-1996, Finance Division O.M. No.F-4(7)Reg.4/72, dated 1-1-1973, O.M. No.F-4(11)Reg.7/72, dated 11-1-1973 and O.M. No.F-6 (6-R.3)84/615, dated 1.8.1984, should have been considered by Service Tribunal while deciding the controversy; whether civil servant pursuant to his appointment letter, would be governed by Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964, Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 and other Government orders/instructions; whether principle of locus poenitentiae could be pressed into service in view of the dictum laid down by Supreme Court in its various judgments; and what would be the impact of Finance Division O.M. No.F-4(7)Reg.4/92, dated 1-1-1973. Chairman Selection Committee v. Wasif Zamir Ahmad 1997 SCMR 15 and Chairman Minimum Wage Board v. Fayyaz Khan Khattak 1999 SCMR 1004 ref.

Judgment & Decree

JAVED IQBAL, J.

This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 11-9-2003 whereby the appeal preferred on behalf of respondent has been accepted by the learned Federal Service Tribunal with the direction that the respondent is entitled to continuation of advance increments after he was re-employed on regular basis in F-6 Rebuild Factory, Kamra.

2. Precisely stated the facts of the case as enumerated in the judgment impugned are to the effect that "the appellant was appointed as Assistant Foreman Radar Fitter (B-14) in F-6 Rebuild Factory, PAC, Kamra vide respondent's order, dated 29-9-1993. The said appointment letter contained conditions, amongst others, that he will be governed by Civil Servant Act, 1973, Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, Government Servant (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and Government Servants (E&D) Rules, 1973. On his appointment, appellant who had higher qualifications of F.Sc. and B.A. was granted two advance increments with effect from 1993 vide respondent's order, dated 16-4-1996. These advance increments allowed to the appellant were suddenly stopped by the respondent vide Organization's letter dated 8-7-1996. Appellant preferred his Departmental Appeal on 8-4-1997 which was rejected vide respondent's letter dated 21-9-2000". Being aggrieved an appeal was preferred before the learned Federal Service 'Tribunal which has been accepted vide judgment impugned, hence this petition.

3. We have heard the learned Deputy Attorney-General on behalf of Chairman PAC Board Kamra, learned Advocate Supreme Court for caveater, scanned the entire record and perused the judgment impugned. We are inclined to grant leave on the following points: (i) Whether duplicate benefit of advance increments can be availed twice i.e. once in the service of PAF and subsequent service as Assistant Foreman Radar Fitter (B-14) in F-6 Rebuild Factory, PAC, Kamra. (ii) Whether the merger of two advance increments granted to respondent in his substantive pay and pension would make him further entitle to obtain two advance increments again from PAC Kamra. (iii) Whether the instructions as contained in Establishment Division O.M. No.10/52/95/R-2, dated 18-7-1996, Finance Division (Reg. Wing) O.M. No. F-5(4)R-3/96, dated 16-4-1996, Finance Division O.M. No.F4(7)-Reg.4/72, dated 1-1-1973, O.M. No.F4(11)-Reg.7/72, dated 11-1-1973 and G.M. No.F6(6-R.3)84/615, dated 1-8-1984 should have considered by the learned Federal Service Tribunal while deciding the controversy. (iv) Whether the respondent pursuant to his appointment letter, dated 29-9-1993 will be governed by the Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964, Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 and other Government orders/ instructions as mentioned hereinabove and the directions issued by the Managing Director PAC, Kamra. (v) Whether the principle of locus poenitentiae can be pressed into service in view of the dictum as laid down in case Chairman Selection Committee v. Wasif Zamir Ahmad 1997 SCMR 15 and Chairman Minimum Wage Board v. Fayyaz Khan Khattak 1999 SCMR 1004. (vi) What should be the impact of relevant extract of the Finance Division O.M. No.F.4(7) Reg.7/92, dated 1-1-1973 which is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-- "The pay of the retired Military personnel re-employed in civil posts may also be fixed in accordance with the above principles. In their case substantive pay shall also include the Following elements provided that they were drawn before retirement/ release/leave pending retirement for a continuous period of 3 years or more: (a) Command/Staff/Charge Pay. (b) Instructional Pay. (c) Qualification Pay. (d) Disturbance Pay." in case of the respondent who was re-employed on 29-9-1993 in PAC Kamra (vii) What should be the impact of letter No.F-6 RF/3113/1/PC (P/C) dated 21-9-2000. The appeal, arising out of this petition, be fixed within six weeks after having the approval of his Lordship the Honourable Chief Justice and meanwhile the operation of impugned judgment shall remain suspended. M.H./C-46/SC Leave granted.