2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

ZIA PERWEZ, J.

Petitioner is widow of one Abdul Rahman, a dismissed employee of Pakistan Railways and has approached this Court seeking payment on account of the dues and benefits payable to the deceased.

2. Deceased Abdul Rahman was employed as Upper Division Clerk with the Pakistan Railways in BPS-7 and is alleged to have put in more than 23 years of service. Petitioner alleged that due to sickness the deceased could not attend to his services and consequently vide order, dated 31-12-2003 he was dismissed. Petitioner also claimed that the deceased preferred an appeal before the General Manager, Pakistan Railways for reinstatement in service on 1-10-2004 but the decision was not communicated till the time the deceased expired on 8-2-2005 after protracted ailment due to cancer. Petitioner claims the following relief:

(i) Service gratuity of 23 years service. (ii) Monthly pension as per schedule. (iii) Group Term Insurance as per schedule. (iv) Monthly Stipendiary from Staff Benevolent Fund as per schedule. (v) Coffin money Rs.5,000. (vi) General Provident Fund.

3. In pursuance of the notice the respondents have filed their comments. It is disputed that any appeal was pending against the order of dismissal. Personal file of the deceased has been made available before the Court and Mr. M.A. Hakeem has been afforded an opportunity to examine the personal file. Mr. Muhammad Yousuf, Head Clerk Litigation, Pakistan Railways, Division Office, Sukkur states that in all cases of pending appeals, a copy of the appeal is also retained on the personal file of an employee if the same is filed. In addition to a separate file pertaining to the specific appeal. In the instant case, according to him, neither there is separate file of appeal nor a copy available on the personal file. Petitioner has not been able to show from the record that such an appeal was ever presented before the concerned authority. The alleged postal receipt produced pertains the address of Secretary, SBC High Court, Karachi. Under the circumstances we proceed on the basis of the law applicable to such cases and directed the respondents to file a statement pertaining to the benefits payable to the heirs of the deceased in pursuance to the provisions of section 19 of Civil Servants Act, 1973. Today respondent No.4 has filed the statement showing the approximate amount of gratuity or pension at the rate of 2/3rd amounting to Rs.1,86,622 or Rs.1,107 per month pension respectively.

4. After going through the amount Mr. M.A. Hakeem, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the word "Pension" includes the word "Gratuity". In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on Rule 12 of the Pakistan Railways (Pension Rules and Retirement Benefits for Railway Servants) Chapter No.4 which reads as under:

"(12) Pension.

Except when the term "pension" is used in contradiction to gratuity, "pension" includes gratuity." His contention is that the word "pension" used in section 19 of the Civil Servants Act also includes gratuity in view of the provisions of section

12. The contention is opposed by Mr. Mehboob Malik, learned counsel for the respondents. He has contended that the word "pension" would be inclusive of gratuity if only one word is used but in the instant case as word "pension" and "gratuity" have been used separately they are thus, in contradiction to each other. In support of his contention the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the case of Ghazala Tariq v. Federation of Pakistan 2005 PLC (C.S.) 271.

5. After hearing the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and going through the statement placed before us, today, showing the amount of service benefits and considering the contentions of the learned counsel we are of the humble opinion that the word "pension" would be inclusive of gratuity only where it has not been used in contradiction of the word "gratuity". Word "Contradiction" is defined in Concise Oxford English Dictionary, Tenth Edition, as under:

"Contradiction n. a combination of statements, ideas, or features which are opposed to one another, the statement of a position opposite to one already made. Phrases contradiction in terms a statement or group of words associating incompatible objects or ideas."

6. In the instant case the words "pension" and "gratuity" are used separately and as such when the word "gratuity" has been used separately the word "pension" cannot be considered to mean gratuity as well because such an interpretation would render the word "gratuity" used in section 19(2) and (3) as superfluous. It is the settled rule of interpretation that meanings should be given to each word used in a statute and an interpretation which renders any word as meaningless is to be avoided. According to this principles we are of the humble opinion that as the words "pension" and "gratuity" have been used separately in the subsection to section 19 therefore, they have their respective meanings. Provision of rule 12 of the Pakistan Railway Employees Rules would only come into play where the two words are not used but only the word "pension" is used with reference to benefits of an employee.

7. In view of our aforesaid opinion we are of the view that the petitioner is entitled to 2/3rd of the pension or gratuity as payable under section 19(3) of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 while the payment of G.P. Fund amount is admitted and the petitioner has admitted that she has received the same. The respondents have in their statements offered compassionate allowance about Rs.1,86,622 gratuity or pension about Rs.1,107 per month. The case of Ghazala Tariq (supra) pertains to an employee who had filed appeal before the Services Tribunal, which was abated due to his death, and his widow filed petition before the High Court while in the instant case no appeal was filed therefore, case of the petitioner is distinguishable.

8. For the foregoing reasons we. would dispose of this petition along with the listed application and allow fifteen days' time to the petitioner to exercise her option to accept either the gratuity or the pension and communicate the same in writing to the respondents and their learned counsel enabling them to proceed with the payment of the dues in the light of exercise of option by the petitioner. The respondents shall release the payment within four weeks from the receipt of the intimation. M.H./S-102/K Order accordingly.