2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Syed Masood Ahmad Gillani and Rana Izhar, ADE for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th March, 2002. Writ Petitions Nos.5275, 5356, 5344, 5345, 5346, 5347, 4968, 4923, 5384 of 2001 and 2047 of 2000,' shall be disposed of by this judgment.

2. Petitioner are employees of Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited in BS-1 to BS-15. They were given house requisition allowance after MTR Memo. No. Requisition/General/11/67, dated 22-9-1999 issued under the authority of General Manager, Multan Telecommunication Region. Subsequently Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited through letter No. ESTATE: 6-1/98, dated 18-1-1999 and Letter No.A-15/IAIR/1999-2000/5, dated 25-9-2001 cancelled the unction granted and directed that the amount paid to the petitioners shall he recovered in instalments.

3. Aggrieved of the afore-referred letters Writ Petition No.2047 of 2000 was submitted in which report and parawise comments were called for, from the respondents. Other writs followed which were Admitted to hearing. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard today.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners did not obtain any benefit from the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited by misrepresentation or fraud rather the benefit namely the house requisition allowances was given to the petitioners by/or under the authority of General Manager, Multan Telecommunication Region of Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited and by virtue of principle of locus poenitentiae, the benefits having been given to the employees could not be taken back by the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited. It was also contended that even if earlier memo. was rescinded by the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited the allowances already paid to the petitioners could not be got refunded by Pakistan Telecommunication Limited and demand of the respondents-Company in this regard was illegal. Learned counsel for the respondents who has submitted report and comments in Writ Petition No.2047 of 2000, submitted that Pakistan Telecommunication Limited never allowed payment of house requisition allowance to any of its functionaries holding BS-1 to 15 posts and even the General Manager, MTR had not given any benefit in this regard and as a matter of fact memo. issued by the General Manager, MTR was wrongly interpreted and house requisition allowance was given to the petitioners without any entitlement and as such the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited is competent to recover the , amount over paid to ,the petitioners and principle of locus poenitentiae was not attracted to the case at all.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused numerous memos./letters issued by the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited.

6. The principle involved in such cases which is based on the principle of locus poenitentiae is quite clear. Where a competent authority confers a benefit such as payment of allowances or additional monetary benefit and subsequently it comes to light that rules applicable to the subject did not cover the situation, the authority which earlier accorded sanction to grant of additional benefit to its employees has the power to withdraw the benefit. But at the same time it is also established that the authority is not competent to recover the amount which the employees have already withdrawn and utilized even if it is found that first order, notification or instructions of the competent authority was not based on any law or was not covered by any rules. The facts and circumstances of the petitioners' case are, however, quite different. Perusal of Memo. No PA&P 13/3/90, dated 12-2-1998 and dated 16-12-1999 clearly shows that Pakistan Telecommunication had never allowed payment of house requisition allowance to its employees who are holding posts in BS-1 to 15 and were granted move-over to grade

16. Such allowance was given to employees who were given selection grade only. The payment of house requisition allowance to petitioners, therefore wag-not based on any Authority or notification or letter having been issued competently by the authority. Memo. dated 22-9-1999 issued by the General Manager, Multan Telecommunication Region which had put a gloss on the memos. of the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited, referred to above, also did not specifically allow payment of house requisition allowance to the petitioners. This memo. otherwise appears to have been issued under some misconception. The house requisition allowance was paid to petitioners without due authority and Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited was well within its rights to have called upon the petitioners for refund of the allowances wrongly paid to them earlier. The principle pressed into service by the petitioners is not attracted to their cases at all. The petitioners under the circumstances stand dismissed. H.B.T./2088/L Petitioner dismissed.