2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

This Intra Court Appeal under Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is directed against the judgment dated 03.11.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge whereby Writ Petition No.8040/2018 filed by the appellant was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed as an Area Manager in the respondent-State Life Insurance Corporation in the month of April, 2014. The respondent started deduction from the monthly salary of the appellant in the name of "Excess Cost". Against the said deduction, the appellant filed Writ Petition No.14758/2014 which was disposed of vide order dated 13.04.2018 in terms of the order dated 04.01.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petition No.340 of 2017. The appellant filed an application to the respondent No.2, Zonal Head, State Life Insurance Corporation, Multan, for making a revised cost after excluding the salary as part of operational cost, which application was not decided by the respondent-corporation; upon which the appellant filed Writ Petition No.8040/2018 with the following prayer: "In view of the above submissions, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that by accepting this writ petition, an appropriate writ may kindly be issued in the following terms: Declaring the action of the respondents to calculate the salary/pay, pension and group insurance of the petitioner as part of the operational cost as illegal, unlawful and against the terms of the orders passed by the Apex Court and Honorable High Court as well as against the appointment letter. Directing the respondents to make a revised cost excluding the salary/pay, pension and group insurance as part of operational cost. Directing the respondents to pay the petitioner all the amount deducted in violation of the appointment letter as well as the order of Supreme Court of Pakistan. The learned Single Judge, vide impugned judgment dated 03.11.2020, dismissed the said writ petition. Hence, this appeal.

3. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone though the record with their able assistance.

4. One of us (Ch. Muhammad Iqbal) has already decided the matter vide judgment dated 11.02.2019, passed in Writ Petition No.230298/2018. The operative portion of judgment dated 11.02.2019 is reproduced as under: "

8. So far as the second prayer of petitioner (in W.P.No.203298/2018) in respect of deduction in salary, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan vide order dated 04.01.2018 passed in Civil Petition No.340 of 2017, has resolved this controversy as under: "Learned counsel for the respondents states that if any amount exceeding 10% of the first year's premium (FYP) as operational cost has ever been given by the petitioners to the respondents, the petitioners are entitled to recover the excess amount even from their salary. This is acceptable to the learned counsel for the petitioners. Therefore, this petition by consent is converted into appeal and disposed of in terms that in case any amount in excess of 10% of the FYP as operational cost was given to the respondents, the petitioners shall be entitled to recover the amount in excess of 10% from the respondents, notwithstanding the impugned judgment of the learned High Court."

9. In view of above, the order passed by the respondent-corporation for down gradation of petitioners from Category B to C due to poor business performance was rightly passed. The deduction in salary done by the respondents corporation as per judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan (supra). Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to point out any illegality or material irregularity in the impugned order passed by the respondents and has also not identified any jurisdictional defect.

5. The Intra Court Appeal No.29469/2019, filed against the aforesaid judgment dated 11.02.2019 has also been dismissed by the learned Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.10.2020. The operative portion of the order dated 12.10.2020 is reproduced as under: "

3. We have heard the counsel for the parties and do not find any reasonable cause to interfere in the judgment of the learned Single Judge which proceeds on a proper application of the State Life Employees Service Regulations, 1973 and in particular Regulation No.4(2)(1)(i)&(ii). The said Regulation by its mandate shows that the performance of an Area Manager shall be reviewed by the Zonal Head on a monthly basis for such periods as the Board may prescribe. In case, the performance falls short of the prescribed standards, the Zonal Head may terminate his service after giving him three months notice or take other measures prescribed in that Regulation. Further, the reliance of the learned Single Judge on a judgment passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Appeals whose reference has been given in paragraph 7 of the judgment, is proper and apt. Suffice to say that in that judgment the Supreme Court of Pakistan left evaluation of employees of Corporation to be determined by the Zonal Head and other superior offices and which was held to be a subjective satisfaction of the Corporation and its officers who were tasked with evaluation of performances. It was not for the Court to upset the evaluation so undertaken by the Corporation and to substitute its own opinion for that of the Corporation."

6. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any illegality or material irregularity in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, as such, instant Intra Court Appeal having no merit, is hereby dismissed. SA/M-152/L Appeal dismissed.