ADDITIONAL ACCOUNTANT-GENERAL PAKISTAN REVENUE, LAHORE versus A.A. ZUBERI
Section 19 Pension Rules, 1969, RR 3 29 and 91 (vii) Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Constitution of Pakistan, Arts 2A, 9 and 25, Section 3 Intro Court of Appeal Pension Benefits Full Pension Restoration Quantum Respondents Retired public servants who received 50% of their pension and their pensions were restored after 15 years, officials complained that the retired government employee should have the same pension as the time of change. There was a payment, not an existing pension amount that consisted of all increments. When the pension was restored at the end of the validity period, retired public servants were once again entitled to 100% pension because the best index to date pension guages that stood on that day was the amount of restoration history of 50% of pensioners who retired. The source was receiving monthly and double the amount received from the pension. The High Court found it absurd to imagine that there was a public servant who was pensioned in the year 2008, which he was entitled to attract in 1993. 15 years ago) by such action the right to livelihood by retired public servants guaranteed under Article 9 of the Constitution. Will be declared a crime that could not be fulfilled, such as pension funds. The test of economic justice, which was an integral part of the pursuit of the right to life, as presented in the Constitution's Proposition and Purpose, when depriving a public servant of his or her legal pension was equally discriminatory. Compared to retired government employees who were performing their current positions. The pension rate, as Article 25 of the Constitution would stifle, any decent system would make these employees so unprofitable.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
