Home Maxims & Terms Commutation of pension meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Commutation of pension

Commutation of pension legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2014 PLC(CS) 73 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 18Punjab Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1955, Ch.VIIIConstitution of Pakistan, Arts.9, 25, 212, 2A, Preamble & 199Constitutional petitionCivil ServicePensionCommutation of pensionQuantum of pension to be granted to civil servants after lapse of the period of commutation, determination ofIncrease in pensionEffect of such increase on the quantum of pension payable after lapse of period of commutation

Petitioners, after retirement from civil service commuted 50% of their pension for a period of 15 years and during said period of commutation, the monthly (50%) pension had increased by certain percentages over the years

Contention of the petitioners/pensioners was that after the period of commutation ended, the restored commuted portion of the pension should be at par with the 50 % pension as it stood after lapse of 15 years

Validity

Pension of the petitioners was increased every year in the range of 5% to 20% and 50% pension of the petitioners in the year 2008 was much higher than in the year 1993

Said increase in pension covered the inflationary tendencies over the years

Pensioners commuted their 50% pension for a period of 15 years, which meant that a lump sum payment of 50% of the pension on the basis of the pension as it stood in the year 1993 was worked out over a future period of 15 years and handed over to the pensioners

During said period of 15 years, the benefit of increase in pension was enjoyed by the pensioners only to the extent of 50% which was the pension received by them monthly

Under the Punjab Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1955, the pension stood restored at the end of the commutation period which meant that the pensioners were once again entitled to 100% pension as it stood on that day

Best index to gauge the pension due on the said date was the amount of 50% pension being received monthly by the pensioners on the said date and pension due would now be double the said amount

Preposterous to imagine that a civil servant be given pension in the year 2008 which he was entitled to draw in 1993 (15 years ago) as such action offended the right to livelihood of the pensioners guaranteed under Art.9 of the Constitution and failed to meet the test of economic justice which is also an integral part of right to life as provided in the Preamble and the Objectives Resolution to the Constitution (Art.2A)

Depriving a civil servant of his lawful pension was also discriminatory when compared to equally placed retired civil servants who were drawing the current rate of pension, which offended Art.25 of the Constitution

No civilized system could provide for such an unreasonable and uneconomical post retirement benefit to their employees who had given their golden years for the public service of the country

Petitioners were therefore, entitled to all increments in pensions accumulated over the last 15 years and restored computed portion of the pension must be at par with the remaining 50% net pension as it stood on the day of the expiry of the commutation period

Constitutional petitions were allowed, accordingly.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Commutation of pension", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124944721

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Commutation of pension"

PLC 2014
Labour Appeal No.LHR-167 of 2013, decided on 16th December, 2013.

2014 P L C 233

PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION through Managing Director, PRTC, Lahore and another Versus KHURSHID AHMAD

Court: Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal
PTD 2010
I.T.A. No.986/IB of 2009, decided on 21st June, 2010.

2010 P T D (Trib

N/A

Court: High Court
PLC(CS) 1992
Service Appeal No. 456, decided on 25th May, 1991.

992 P L C (C

Khawaja MUHAMMAD MUMTAZ Versus SECRETARY EDUCATION, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR,

Court: Service Tribunal Azad J&K
PLC(CS) 2010
Constitutional Petitions Nos.D-135 and D-286 of 2007, decided on 26th June, 2010.

2010 P L C (C

TAHIR AHMED and others Versus NAEEM IQBAL and others

Court: Karachi High Court
PLC 2014
Labour Appeal No.LHR-624 of 2012, decided on 9th May, 2013.

2014 P L C 248

PRESIDENT, ALLIED BANK LIMITED and 2 others Versus ABDUL HAMEED

Court: Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal
PLC(CS) 2021
Writ Petition No.3908 of 2018, decided on 30th December, 2019.

2021 P L C (C

Syed MUHAMMAD ZARARULLAH and 7 others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance Division and 2 others

Court: Islamabad High Court
PTD 2002
I.T.A. No.2245/KB of 2001, decided on 9th April, 2002.

2002 P T D (Trib

N/A

Court: Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan
SCMR 2011
Civil Petition No. 617- L of 2010, decided on 8th June, '2011.

2011 SCMR 1410

ABDUL RAFIMAN QURESHI -Petitioner Versus AUDITOR-GENERAL OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLC(CS) 2012
Civil Petition No. 617-L of 2010, decided on 8th June, 2011.

2012 P L C (C

ABDUL RAHMAN QURESHI Versus AUDITOR-GENERAL OF PAKISTAN and others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLC(CS) 2011
4. Chaudary Muhammad Ashraf Khan learned counsel for the Respondent-Bank referred to the last para of Circular dated February 27, 1998 which provided that those who opted for GHS would not be entitled to the benefits of ad hoc relief. Learned counsel also referred to para 14 of the comments where it is stated that since the Petitioners had accepted GHS benefits and signed certain documents in this regard they were no longer aggrieved persons so as to be entitled to maintain the Petitions. Learned counsel referred to the orders passed by the honourable Supreme Court in S.M. Tanvir Nusrat v. National Bank of Pakistan Civil Petition No.1261 of 2002 (decided on 6-10-2003) and Rana Abdul Ghafoor v. N.B.P. and 3 others Civil Petition No.3378-L of 2001 (order dated 13-10-2005). Learned counsel submitted that as far as judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Islam Ahmed (supra) is concerned the honourable Supreme Court in N.B.P. v. Naseem Arif Abbasi and others Civil Petition No.342-K of 2009 on 8-5-2009 not only granted leave to appeal but has also suspended operation of the impugned Judgment.

2011 PLC (C

MUHAMMAD USMAN KHAN and 5 others Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN

Court: Sindh High Court