PLC(CS)N 2018

2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)

Dr. ZULFIQAR ALI Versus KIU through Vice-Chancellor and 3 others

Jurisdiction / Court
Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court
Decided Date
W.P. No.120 of 2015, decided on 18th October, 2017.
Honorable Judges
Malik Haq Nawaz and Muhammad Umer, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)
Forum / Court Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court
Bench Members Malik Haq Nawaz and Muhammad Umer, JJ
Parties Dr. ZULFIQAR ALI Versus KIU through Vice-Chancellor and 3 others
Primary Law Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)?

This judgment primarily cites: Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)?

The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: Malik Haq Nawaz and Muhammad Umer, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N) (Dr. ZULFIQAR ALI Versus KIU through Vice-Chancellor and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009

Representation

  • Amjad Hussain for Petitioners.
  • Mir Zeshan Akhlaque assisted by Hamidullah, Dy. Registrar Legal for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

Art.71 (2)

Notification No. F2(1)/DFA (Edu)06 dated 29-03-2007

Faculty members of University sought 50% special allowance of basic pay

Contending that faculty members of BPS category had been allowed such special allowance but they had been deprived

Validity

Special allowance for teaching and non-teaching staff of the University had been allowed

University had examined the case for grant of 50% allowance to the petitioners-employees but did not agree as allowances admissible to faculty members of BPS category were not permissible to the faculty members, their appointment being of different nature with particular pay package higher than BPS category employees

Faculty members were employed on different terms and conditions as compared to the employees of BPS category and they could not be treated at par

Senate of the University being apex body to resolve such issues had rendered its findings against the petitioners on solid and cogent grounds

Writ petition was dismissed in circumstances. [Paras. 5, 6 & 7 of the judgment]

Judgment & Decree

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.

Dr. Zulfiqar Ali, Assistant Professor ad 17 others by means of the instant writ petition bearing No.120/2015 have sought following prayers:--

1. That the petitioners may be declared entitled for grant of 50% Special KIU Allowance, being the high qualified teaching staff of KIU.

2. That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay 50% Special KIU Allowance to the petitioners with effect from 2007 i.e. date of notification.

3. That the respondents may be directed to pay arrears 50% special pay to the petitioners.

4. Any other remedy which this Honourable Court deems proper may also be granted in favour of petitioners to meet the ends of justice.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are performing their duties in Karakorum International University Gilgit-Baltistan. The learned counsel stated further that on the directives of the President of Pakistan directive No.438 was issued and was accordingly implemented by the Secretary Finance Government of Pakistan vide their letter No. F2(1)/DFA(Edu)06 dated 29.03.2007, whereby 50% special KIU allowance of basic pay was allowed to the teaching and non-teaching staff, who were not being paid 50% hard area allowance. The Higher Education Commission communicated the Government of Pakistan about the above allowance vide their letter No.FP.2-92/HEC/01/500 dated 03.04.2007, which is not being paid to the petitioners in clear violation of the policy and principles of equal among the equal. The learned counsel further contended that there are two categories of teaching faculty in KIU i.e. TTS and BPS, the BPS category of KIU is enjoying the facility of 50% KIU allowance but the people/employees of TTS category are not being paid the above allowance, which is against the concept of equity and fair play. The discrimination is not permissible under law and is against the mandate of the Constitution of Pakistan and Self-Governance Order, 2009. Lastly the learned counsel prayed that the matter was taken up with the Senate of KIU and the Senate refused to extend the facility of 50% KIU allowance to the petitioners vide their order dated 24.08.2015, which may be declared illegal and unwarranted and also without lawful authority.

3. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondents opposed the petition and the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners with the submission that the petitioners, who are employed as TTS are awarded high salaries as compared to the BPs staff, only with a view that as per their terms of service and rules 2.4.2, the salary scales of the faculty members as TTS are all inclusive and no other allowance is admissible, i.e. Ph.D allowance, medical allowance, orderly allowance etc. Per learned counsel the faculty members of TTS belongs to different category and cannot be placed equal to the faculty members of BPs. Lastly the learned counsel submitted that there is no discrimination or disparity and the highest body of the KIU which is Senate, after a long and thorough deliberations have not acceded the grant of 50% KIU allowance to the petitioners.

4. We have heard the parties at a considerable length and examined the available record and the material presented by both the parties. For the purpose of ready reference the relevant notifications are reproduced as under:- HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION H-9, ISLAMABAD Tel: 9040151, Fax: 9257436 Website: www.hec.gov.pk No.F.P.2-92/HEC/01/500 Dated April 3, 2007 Subject:- Incentives for Faculty of Karakurum International University, Gilgit. Dear Sir, In accordance with the President's Directive No. 438 that "HEC to propose some incentives for faculty of Karakurum International University, Gilgit, HEC took up the matter with the Finance Division, Govt. of Pakistan for Special KIU Allowance for teaching and non-teaching staff of Karakurum International University, Gilgit. The Finance Division has approved "Special KIU Allowance" @ 50% of basic pay to teaching and non-teaching staff of KIU, Gilgit who are not paid 50% Hard Area Allowance as conveyed vide their letter No.F.1(1)/DFA(Edu)/06 dated 29.03.2007. A copy of the same is enclosed for your reference. With regards. Yours Sincerely, Sd/xxxxxxxx (Hafiz Khalil ur Rehman) Director (F.P/Budget) The Vice Chancellor, Karakurum International University, Gilgit. Copy to: Mr. Qurban Jan, Treasurer, Karakurum International University, Gilgit. -2- Government of Pakistan Finance Division Subject:- INCENTIVE FOR FACULTY OF KARAKURUM INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, GILGIT. Ref: Higher Education Commission's letter No.F.P.2-92/HEC/06, dated November 28, 2006. In the light of the President Directive No.438, Finance Secretary has been pleased to approve the grant of Special KIU Allowance @ 50% of basic pay to the teaching and non-teaching staff of Karakurum International University, Gilgit who are not paid 50% Hard Area Allowance.

2. HEC may kindly proceed further accordingly. Sd/xxxxxxxx (Hafeez-ur-Rahman) DFA(EDU) Adviser (Finance), Higher Education Commission, Islamabad. F.A. Organization's u.o. No. F.2(1)/DFA(Edu)/06, dated 29.3.2007. Copy to Mr. Mir Tahzeem Akhtar, Assistant Treasurer, Karakurum International University, Gilgit Sd/xxxxxxxx (Hafeez-ur-Rahman) DFA(EDU) -3- MODIFICATION No. KIU-Senate-10/2015/26993. In partial modification of this office Notification No. KIU-Senate-10/2015/26308, dated 1st June, 2015, the notification may be read as: "In exercise of the powers vested under section-17 subsection 2(e) of the University Order, 2008, the University Senate in its 10th meeting held on 3rd May, 2015, on the appeal of TTS Faculty for grant of 50% KIU Allowance, the House did not agree to the proposal on the grounds that allowances admissible to BPS faculty are not permissible to the faculty on TTS being different nature of appointment with particular pay package higher than BPS employees. However the House requested Dr. Ghulam Raza Bhatti, Member HEC to appraise the Chairman HEC regarding the concerns of the KIU Senate for early resolution of the case for enhancement of pay of TTS faculty @ Rs.25% under process at Finance Division, Islamabad." Dated: 24th August, 2015 Sd/xxxx Registrar C.C.

1. Executive Secretary to the Vice-Chancellor.

2. Treasurer KIU

3. Copy for appellants.

5. A critical study of the above notifications shows that the President Directive No.438 was communicated to have been approved by the Finance Division and the said notification depicts in very clear terms that special KIU allowance for teaching and non-teaching staff of KIU has been approved at the rate of 50% of basic pay. The notification of HEC dated April 3, 20107 is available at page 9 of the paper book. The contents of Government of Pakistan Finance Division's Notification dated 29.3.2007 are almost all same as discussed above. The notification dated 24.8.2015 is unambiguous and it depicts in clear terms that the KIU Senate in exercise of the powers vested under section 17 subsection (2)(e) of the University Order, 2008, the University Senate in its 10th meeting held on 13.05.2015 on the appeal of TTS faculty examined the case for grant of 50% KIU allowance, but did not agree for the simple reasons that allowances admissible to BPS faculty are not permissible to the faculty of TTS being different nature of appointment with particular pay package higher than BPS employees.

6. In view of above discussions, we are of the view that the members of TTS are employed on different terms and conditions as compared to the employees of BPS. They cannot be treated at par and there is no discrimination. Furthermore the KIU Senate being the apex body to resolve such like issues has also rendered its findings against the petitioners on very solid and cogent grounds and the decision of KIU Senate is in line with the initial terms and conditions of service of TTS employees which they accepted and joined as TTS in KIU.

7. There is no merit in the above writ petition which is dismissed. C. Misc. No.334/2017 annexed with the writ petition is also disposed of accordingly. ZC/223/GB Petition dismissed.