2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.

This petition is directed against order, dated 1-5-2000, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Appeal No. 738 of 1995.

2. The petitioner, a retired employee of a Ministerial cadre, performed the duties of the higher post of Accounts Assistant from 4-1-1962 to 2-11-1970. He was, however, promoted as Assistant Accountant with retrospective effect from 25-2-1969. His claim for financial benefits for the higher post of Accounts Assistant was not acceded by the departmental authorities. The petitioner preferred Appeal No.738 of 1995 before the Tribunal which was also dismissed by the impugned judgment, dated 1-5-2000. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner was entitled to the financial benefits for the higher post of Accounts Assistant for the period he had performed' the duties of the said post in terms of policy decision, dated 30-11-1991 of the respondent No.1. It was further pointed out that in some other similar cases such benefits had been given by the respondents.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents argued that the petitioner had already retired from service on 31-12-1989. He was, therefore, not entitled to claim any benefit under the policy decision, dated 30-11-1991. It was further contended that the executive instructions issued by the WAPDA could not operate retrospectively to the benefit of employees who already stood retired from service.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. By policy decision, dated 30-11-1991, the respondent No. l allowed financial benefits to an individual for the period he actually worked against the higher post (underlining is ours). It is quite clear that the said policy decision was intended to extend financial benefits to the WAPDA employees for the period they had actually worked against the higher post. The retired employees of WAPDA were not excluded from the purview of the aforesaid policy decision. It is well-settled that, in appropriate cases, the executive authorities are empowered to issue instructions or take policy decision retrospectively which are beneficial in nature. Reference may- usefully be made to the case of Messrs Elahi Cotton Mills Ltd. and others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary M/O Finance, Islamabad and 6 others (PLD 1997 SC 582). The Tribunal took an erroneous view of the matter that the earlier judgment, dated 10-11-1977, passed by the Punjab Labour Court, declining the relief to the petitioner had f9reclosed the matter. In the present case the petitioner preferred his claim on the basis of instructions, dated 10-11-1991 issued by WAPDA. In some other similar cases, financial benefits to the officials, who were otherwise junior to the petitioner, were granted for the period they had worked.

6. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed. The impugned judgment, dated 1-5-2000 passed by the Tribunal is set aside. The petitioner shall be entitled to the financial benefits for the higher post of Accounts Assistant. S.A.K./M-31/S Petition allowed.