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.
Civil Petition No. 193 of 1980, decided on 14th March, 1981.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9‑9‑1950 of the Services Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No. 626 (R)/74).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑
Art. 212(3)‑Refund of salary in connection with refixation of pay in service‑Proceedings for recovery of emoluments‑Right to sue in such cases being inheritable, on death of deceased petitioner, his legal heirs, held, fully entitled to continue proceedings launched by deceased‑Leave to appeal granted.‑‑[Civil service].
Muhammad Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advo cate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 14th March, 1981.
,
.‑This petition is directed against the order dated 9‑9‑1980 passed by the Services Tribunal Islamabad in Appeal No. 626(R) of 1974, whereby the said appeal was held to have abated on the death of the original appellant (Mr. Muhammad Nawaz).
The relevant facts are that the predecessor‑in‑interest of the present petitioners filed an appeal in the Services Tribunal, Islamabad, on 16‑8‑1974 (626‑R/74) alleging that Rs. 2,760 which was the substantive pay as Joint Secretary of the Government of Pakistan could not be reduced on account of the severance of his relationship with the Pakistan Army. Furthermore, on his promotion as Additional Secretary with effect from 1st December, 1972 he continued to enjoy the protection of pay of Rs. 2,760 instead of Rs. 2,750 prescribed for that grade.
While the appeal was still pending Mr. Muhammad Nawaz passed away and the Legal Representatives of the deceased (the petitioners herein) tried to continue the said appeal but the learned Tribunal held that as the right to sue came to an end with the death of the civil servant concerned the appeal was liable to dismissal as having abated. In coming to this conclusion, the learned Tribunal relied upon two of its previous decisions, wherein the same view was taken. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
Mr. Muhammad Bilal, in support of this petition, submitted that as the question involved was one of refund of salary in connection with refixation of pay in the service, the proceedings for the recovery of the emoluments alleged to be recoverable which were initiated by the predecessor- in‑interest of the present petitioners did not abate. The right to sue, in case of this kind, was inheritable and on the death of Mr. Muhammad Nawaz, his Legal Representatives were fully entitled to continue the proceedings launched by him. The appeal could not, therefore, be held to have abated.
As the question raised is one of public importance and also one o first impression, we would, accordingly, grant leave to appeal in the matter. Order accordingly.
Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer