DR. GHULAM RABANI KHAN versus PCSIR THROUGH CHAIRMAN, ISLAMABAD
Article 199 constitutional petition, petitioner, a former employee challenged the letter, on the basis of the indoor and outdoor medical facility he received to prevent his monthly pension, Rs 437,505. Can be recovered, with no jurisdiction and no legal effect, the employer / department has claimed that the applicant has claimed that he is not doing any service after retirement, nor does anyone Is employed in the type of job and on such basis refrained from any increase in pension. , That he was not serving anywhere after his retirement, and on such a declaration allowed the department to pay him. Such an act of the applicant is a violation of the departmental rules and regulations, during his employment he declared that there was no employment thereafter. Retirement, therefore, a 20% increase in pensions can be paid as a false declaration preventing the applicant from seeking any relief from the High Court by the ration and similar act to repay the medical claim. The petitioner did not approach the High Court with open hands, the constitutional petition was rejected by the High Court.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
