Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
1971 S C M R 664
Present : Sajjad Ahmad and M. R. Khan, JJ
Ch. SALAHUDDIN AND 98 OTHERS‑Petitioners
versus
THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS --Respondents
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 109 of 1971, decided on 25th October 1971.
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the i5th April 1971, in Writ Petition No. 1774/S of 1970).
Constitution of Pakistan (1962),
Art. 98‑Government servant- Claim for enhanced pay in terms of Government Press Communique -Whether said Press Communique applicable to petitioners‑Matter not guaranteed in Constitution‑Petitioners cannot seek redress in matter by having recourse to Art. 98.
A. G. Chaudhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 25th October 1971.
M. R. KHAN, J.‑
The petitioners are S. A. S. Accountants working in the Audit Department in the office of the Accountant- General, Lahore. Their pay‑scale, as fixed on the 21st August 1957, was Rs. 250‑15‑4110‑EB‑15‑505. After the revision of pay -scales, their pay was refixed in the scale of Rs. 335‑15‑380‑20 480‑EB‑20‑660. The fixation of their pay in the above scale was alleged by the petitioners to be illegal, and they claimed enhanced pay from the 1st December 1962, in terms of the Government Press Communique, dated the 29th November 1962. This claim having been denied by the Government, they made a writ petition for refixation of their pay in accordance with the press com munique, dated the 29th November 1962. The Government gave the benefit of the said press communique to only six out of the 99 petitioners, namely, petitioners Nos. 2, 31, 32, 53, 57 and 96, but declined to give the benefit thereof to the remaining petitioners on the ground that they were not in service in the S. A. S. cadre on the 1st December 1962, as required under the press communique. The High Court accepted the contention of the Government arid dismissed the writ petition. The petition for special leave is directed against the High Court's order.
The petitioner's remuneration as stood fixed before the filing of the writ petition was not affected in the least; their only grievance is that they should have been given the benefit of the press communique, dated the 29th November 1962. Whether the said press communique is applicable to them or not, is a matter not guaranteed in the Constitution. Hence, the petitioners can not seek redress in the matter by having recourse to Article 98 of the 1962‑Constitution.
The petition is dismissed.
Petition dismissed,
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer