Find a Lawyer

MS. SALMA MOOSAJEE versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Article 185 Civil Service Optional Retirement Plan Past and Closing Transaction Appellant received a retirement under the Optional Retirement Plan but subsequently demanded an increase in salaries, which was rejected by the High Court on payment of the current amount on payroll basis. The plan was to tell. 26 6 2002 and the appellants voluntarily and without coercion filed the option form on 1 8 2002, hence, their present salary was their salary which was 26 6 2002 and not under the optional retirement plan. Regular pension benefits which were higher in salaries paid in the past and could not benefit from any increase in appellants' retirement after a closed transaction were effective, despite the fact that the High Court judge Was not subject to any kind of illegal interference was unthinkable and the Supreme Court did not demand any interference. Had been Appeal dismissed

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2014

• WUKALA MAHAZ BARAI TAHAFAZ DASTOOR v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2014 SCMR 111
• WAHID BAKHSH WATTOO v. PAK AMERICAN FERTILIZERS LIMITED 2014 SCMR 113
• Dr. IMRAN KHATTAK v. Ms. SOFIA WAQAR KHATTAK, PSO TO CHIEF JUSTICE 2014 SCMR 122
• ACTION AGAINST DISTRIBUTION OF DEVELOPMENT FUNDS BY EX-PRIME MINISTER RAJA PARVAIZ ASHRAF 2014 PLD 131
• RUSTAM v. AURANGZEB 2014 SCMR 146
• ASIF YOUSAF v. SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, CBR, ISLAMABAD 2014 SCMR 147
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. Mst. AISHA 2014 SCMR 151
• COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOW COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LAHORE v. AYESHA WOOLEN MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED 2014 SCMR 154

All Supreme Court judgments of 2014 →

list of supreme court advocates from Panjan Kisan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes