PLC(CS) 2023

2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

AHMAD KHAN Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Government of Pakistan,

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar High Court
Decided Date
W.P. No. 1147-P of 2017, decided on 27th March, 2018*.
Honorable Judges
Qaiser Rashid Khan and Muhammad Ayub Khan, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Peshawar High Court
Bench Members Qaiser Rashid Khan and Muhammad Ayub Khan, JJ
Parties AHMAD KHAN Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Government of Pakistan,
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar High Court bench comprising: Qaiser Rashid Khan and Muhammad Ayub Khan, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2023 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (AHMAD KHAN Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Government of Pakistan,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Muhammad Shabbir Khalil for Petitioner.
  • 3. In the morning, when we took up this petition for hearing, we put on notice both the learned Assistant Attorney General Mr. Mansoor Tariq and the learned Additional Advocate General Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah along with Mr. Muhammad Adil Khan, advocate representing FDMA to assist us in the matter.
  • After a while, when they put up appearance, we questioned Mr. Mansoor Tariq, the learned Assistant Attorney General as to why the petitioners have been deprived from the full compensatory amount as paid to the legal heirs of other Shuhada, he stated that the said amount of Rs.3 million is only meant for Shuhada, who have remained regular government servants and that Shuhada in the present petitions were only engaged in duty with the Polio Eradication Team. When still questioned as to why the authorities have made different and distinct classes of martyrs, he stated that this is what the policy of the government is all about. Anyway, our attention was still drawn to a Special Situation Report dated 01.03.2014 addressed by the Political Tehsildar Jamrud to the Assistant Political Agent Jamrud, Khyber Agency where the names of Shuhada namely Amjad and Shafi figure as proxy Khassadars. In this respect, the learned Assistant Attorney General states that such Khassadars are engaged by the political administration on contract basis. We wonder that where Shuhada in these petitions were engaged on contract basis and when they embraced martyrdom while performing their duties with the Polio Eradication Team in the Khyber Agency, then why they should be treated with a different yardstick. We have not been able to get satisfactory replies in respect of the queries posed to both the learned Assistant Attorney General and learned Additional Advocate General in this respect. Moreso, it is always expected of the authorities that they should be displaying a degree of fairness while framing their policies, especially, in cases where people knowing well the nature and sensitivity of their job description, still go all out to perform their duties and in the process meet with such fateful incidents like the present one.

Headnotes / Summary

Contract officials

Compensation for legal heirs, payment of

Petitioners were legal heirs of deceased officials who laid their lives while escorting Polio Workers during Polio Eradication Campaign

Grievance of petitioners was that instead of full compensation of Rs. 3 million they were given only Rs.300,000

Plea raised by authorities was that the deceased officials were employed on contract basis and were not regular employees

Validity

Deceased-Shahuda were engaged on contract basis and they embraced martyrdom while performing their duties with Polio Eradication Team in Khyber Agency

Deceased officials should not have been treated with different yardstick

Authorities should display a degree of fairness while framing policies, especially in cases where officials/employees knowing well the nature and sensitivity of their job description still go all out to perform their duties and in the process, met with fateful incidents such as in the present case

High Court directed the authorities to pay balance amount of Rupees 2.7 million to legal heirs of Shaheed Officials

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly. Mansoor Tariq, Assistant Attorney General for the Federation. Muhammad Adil Khan for FDMA.

Judgment & Decree

QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.

Through this common judgment, we intend to dispose of the present writ petition No. 1147-P of 2017 along with the connected W.Ps. Nos.1148-P and 1149-P of 2017 as identical questions of law and facts are involved in all these petitions.

2. In the petition in hand, the petitioner is the father of Shaheed Amjad, who served as Khassadar in Khassadar Force, Khyber Agency, in W.P.No.1148-P of 2017 petitioner is the brother of Shaheed Farhad, who served as Levy Sepoy in the Khyber Agency while in the W.P. No.1149-P of 2017, the petitioner is the father of Shaheed Shafi Ullah, who served as Khassadar, in the Khassadar Force, Khyber Agency and on the fateful day i.e. 01.03.2014, while escorting the Polio Workers in the Polio Eradication Campaign, embraced martyrdom due to explosion caused by a bomb planted by the road side but as against the payment of Rs.3 million by way of compensation in such like cases, only a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- has been paid to the legal heirs of each Shaheed and that is how the petitioners are before this court with their grievances.

3. In the morning, when we took up this petition for hearing, we put on notice both the learned Assistant Attorney General Mr. Mansoor Tariq and the learned Additional Advocate General Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah along with Mr. Muhammad Adil Khan, advocate representing FDMA to assist us in the matter. After a while, when they put up appearance, we questioned Mr. Mansoor Tariq, the learned Assistant Attorney General as to why the petitioners have been deprived from the full compensatory amount as paid to the legal heirs of other Shuhada, he stated that the said amount of Rs.3 million is only meant for Shuhada, who have remained regular government servants and that Shuhada in the present petitions were only engaged in duty with the Polio Eradication Team. When still questioned as to why the authorities have made different and distinct classes of martyrs, he stated that this is what the policy of the government is all about. Anyway, our attention was still drawn to a Special Situation Report dated 01.03.2014 addressed by the Political Tehsildar Jamrud to the Assistant Political Agent Jamrud, Khyber Agency where the names of Shuhada namely Amjad and Shafi figure as proxy Khassadars. In this respect, the learned Assistant Attorney General states that such Khassadars are engaged by the political administration on contract basis. We wonder that where Shuhada in these petitions were engaged on contract basis and when they embraced martyrdom while performing their duties with the Polio Eradication Team in the Khyber Agency, then why they should be treated with a different yardstick. We have not been able to get satisfactory replies in respect of the queries posed to both the learned Assistant Attorney General and learned Additional Advocate General in this respect. Moreso, it is always expected of the authorities that they should be displaying a degree of fairness while framing their policies, especially, in cases where people knowing well the nature and sensitivity of their job description, still go all out to perform their duties and in the process meet with such fateful incidents like the present one.

4. Accordingly, we admit and allow this and the connected writ petitions in terms of directing the respondents to pay the balance amount of Rs.2.7 million to the legal heirs of each Shaheed as in other cases. The needful be done within two months. MH/323/P Petition allowed.