Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 5166 of 1981, decided on 8th June, 1983.

‑‑ R. 14‑Pension of retired teachers of District Council‑Sanctioned with effect from 1st July, 1974 under instructions of Government- Pension drawn for about 18 months and then stopped by District Council on account of paucity of funds ‑Affected teachers invoking writ jurisdiction of High Court against stoppage of their pension -During hearing District Council and Government settling matter and reporting to High Court regarding entitlement of petitioners of due pension and availability of funds ‑High Court disposing of writ petition in terms of settlement, between parties including agreement of petitioners to refund amount of Provident Fund received on occasion of retirement‑Writ jurisdiction‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199.

A. W. Butt and Nazir A. Cheema for Petitioners.

Aslam Shahid for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

Tanvir Ahmed Khan, A. A.‑G. for Respondent No. 3.

Date of hearing: 8th June, 1983.

The petitioners, 32 in number, are retired teachers of the District Council, Sialkot. They were found entitled to the grant of pension under the West Pakistan Local Councils (Pension) Rules, 1964, read with ins tructions of the Government of the Punjab Local Government and Social Welfare Department, Memorandum dated 30th November, 1976. The District Council, it is stated; in compliance with the said instructions, awarded pension to the petitioners w. e. f. 1st July, 1974.

2. The petitioners are also stated to have drawn pension for about 1‑1/2 years, before it was stopped by the respondents w. e. f. 6th February, 1978. The allegation is that this was done on account of paucity of funds with the District Council. To this purpose, the District Council started communication with the Commissioner for getting released certain funds. The case was also referred to the Government. The Government in turn denied its liability and threw the ball back in the Court of the District Council.

3. There was a further dispute about the date of the payment of the pension. On 3rd December, 1980 the Government of the Punjab, inquired from respondent No. 1, if it had started to make payment of pension. Direction to pay the same was also issued. It was further observed that the Finance Department had been approached by the Local Government and Rural Development for sanctioning a sum of Rs. 15 lacs for the pur pose. Another directive was also ordered to be issued, vide Memorandum dated 12th July, 1981 by the Government to the District Council. 'The net result was that the matter kept hanging in fire and petitioners were not paid their dues. It was in that situation that they filed this petition.

4. After arguing this case, before this Court, on a few occasions, the learned Advocate‑General asked to seek instructions from the Government, as there was no dispute about the liability. The question requiring settlement was about the funds or the means and how to discharge the liability.

5. The parties have today appeared before me to report that they matter has finally been settled as under :‑---

(i) the teachers retired before 1st of July, 1980 will be entitled to pension ; and

(ii) Rs. 20 lacs payable by the Provincial Government to the Zila Council has been adjusted.

The learned counsel for the District Council, however, referred to rule 14 of the Rules mentioned above and stated that the petitioners should refund the Provident Fund, paid by the District Council to them, on the occasion of their retirement. The petitioners accept their liability on that account and state that the District Council, while paying theca the pension may adjust those amounts.

In view of the above, this petition succeeds. The parties shall bear their own costs.

A. E. Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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