Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 199 of 1979, decided on 20th May, 1979.

(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 31‑1‑1979 of the Lahore High Court at Lahore in Writ Petition No. 833 of 1977).

----Art. 185(3)‑Leave to appeal to Supreme Court‑Dispute having arisen between parties as. to fixation of terms and conditions of respondent's service, Supreme Court holding respondent entitled to emoluments (a) R s. 1,400 p. m: in addition to his Army pension in terms of contract offered to him and accepted by him and to be not entitled to any other benefits and as such under liability to refund any amounts drawn by him in excess of his true entitlement‑Parties not able to resolve their dispute in spite of such final order and on demand being made to refund specified excess amount respondent filing writ petition‑High Court holding appropriate cause for respondent in such case being to seek further clarification on points raised by him from Supreme Court and adjourning writ petition sine die but respondent not moving Supreme Court for any clarifica tion in pursuance to High Court's order‑Eventually High Court ordering petitioner to hear respondent and decide dispute in light of Supreme Court's decision and .to submit a report to High Court Order passed by High Court, held; eminently fair and no just and griev ance could arise in allowing respondent to be so heard.

Muhammad Ilyas Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Z. Khaki, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Respondent in person.

Date of hearing : 20th May, 1979.

‑This is a petition for special leave from an order dated 31st of January 1979, passed by a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court at Lahore in Writ Petition No. 833 of 1977, filed by the respondent herein against the present petitioners.

Briefly stated the dispute in this case relates to the fixation of the terms and conditions of service of the respondent Lt.‑Col. (Rtd.) :J. D. Malik, in his capacity as a member of the West Pakistan Co‑operative Board set up by the Provincial Government with effect from the 7th of May, 1962 in exercise of the powers conferred on it by section 3 of the West Pakistan (Co‑operative) Board Ordinance XIV of 1962 and the emolu ments drawn by him ever since. In anticipation of the constitution of the Board, Mr. Riazuddin Ahmad, the then Commissioner, Co‑operative Societies, West Pakistan addressed a D. O. letter on the 16th of February, 1962, to the respondent who was at the time serving in East Pakistan, as Chairman of the Small Industries Corporation, Dacca, informing him that he had proposed his name for appointment as a Member of the West Pakistan Co‑operative Board for the Department of Industries, Trade and Transport on a salary of Rs. 1,400 p. m. . He was further informed that the order of his appointment was likely to be issued in about 10 days time. The respondent accepted this offer and resumed the charge of his appointment with effect from 13th of May, 1962. In course of tine disputes and differences arose between the parties about the terms and conditions of service of the respondent and the emoluments drawn by hint, The matter was ultimately taken upto the level of the Supreme Court in cross appeals by special leave filed by the aggrieved parties and those were eventually disposed of by a learned Bench of this Court by a consolidated order passed on the 2nd of May 1974. In conclusion this Court held as under:‑--

"The final and simple position which therefore, emerges in this case is that Lt.‑Col. J. D. Malik was entitled to emoluments at the rate of Rs. 1,400 p. m. in addition to his Army pension in terms of the contract offered to him by Mr. Riaz‑ud‑Din Ahmad and accepted by him when he assumed office as Member of the Board with effect from the 13th of May, 1962. He was not entitled as of right, to claim any other allowances, privileges, facilities or special pay, by reference to, any orders issued by the Central Government from time to time, nor could his terms be varied by the Provincial Government orders dated the 31st of August, 1963. On this view of the matter, had is liable to refund any amounts or advances which he. has drawn in. excess of his true entitlement, and which have not been otherwise authorised by the competent authority. It is of course always open to the Government to make any ex gratial payment if it so desires."

In spite of this final order the parties have not been able to resolve s their dispute between ‑them as to the liability of the respondent to refund any amounts or advances, if any, drawn by him in excess of his true entitlement. According to the petitioners the respondent was found liable to refund the amount and advances drawn by him in excess by him to the extent of Rs. 1,06,617.07 and a demand for the refund in respect thereof was accordingly made on him. He therefore, filed the Writ Petition No. 833 of 1977 under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan questioning the legality of such an order passed against him by the petitioners. At first, on the 3rd of May, 1977,.Mr. Justice Dr. Nasim Hassan Shah, Judge of the High Court at Lahore (as he then was) passed an order to the effect that the most appropriate course for the respondent herein was to have sought further clarification on the points raised by him from the Supreme Court for their satisfactory disposal. With these observations therefore, he adjourned the writ petition before him sine die. The respondent however, did not move this Court for any clarification in pursuance to this order. Eventually the writ petition filed by the respondent was put up for hearing before Mr. Justice Gul Muhammad Khan who on receipt of a report from the petitioners passed the following order:‑--

"Let respondent No. 1 (petitioner No. 1 herein) therefore, hear the petitioner (respondent 'No. 1) and decide the dispute in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court and submit a report to be received within two months."

It is against this order that the two petitioners have filed this petition for special leave, while the aforementioned writ petition filed by the respondent against them is still pending in the High Court at Lahore.

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in this petition before us. The impugned order passed by the High Court is eminently just and fair in directing the petitioners to hear the respondent and decide the dispute afresh in the light of 'the decision of the Supreme Court. There could be no grievance against allowing the respondent to be heard in disposing of the outstanding dispute in the light of the judgment, already delivered by the Supreme Court. We therefore, find that this is hardly a fit case for interference by this Court in these proceedings. This petition has no force and is therefore, rejected.

Petition rejected.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.