LHC Rawalpindi Bench Judgement Regarding Special Pay to Employees of Special Courts

Category: miscellaneous, News 170 0

Grant of Special Pay Equivalent to Three Times of Basic Pay & Utility Allowance to the Employees of Special Courts-Decision of the LHC Rawalpindi Bench

The Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi has given its decision on 19-02-2014 in connection with the Grant of Special Pay Equivalent to Three Times of Basic Pay  & Utility Allowance with effect from 01-03-2010 to the Employees of Special Courts performing their duties in connection with administration of justice under the administrative control of Ministry of Law & Justice Division, Islamabad. The detail of this decision is as under:

Through this constitutional petition, the petitioners employees of Special Courts performing their duties in connection with administration of justice under the administrative control of Ministry of Law & Justice Division, Islamabad pray for giving effect to the recommendations of National Judicial Policy Making Committee and grant them the Special Pay equivalent to three times of the Basic Pay, Utility Allowance wef 01-03-2010as has been done in case of the other judicial officers and staff of the district judiciary, members of the staff of the Federal Courts, the Courts subordinate to the Sindh High Court, Karachi and the Tribunals in the light of the judgment dated 31-10-2012, passed in writ petition No. 20968 of 2009 by this court.

Learned Council for petitioners relying on the judgment dated 31-10-2012, referred to above and the judgment dated 21-03-2013, passed in writ petition No. 536/2013 by the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, contends that the petitioners contemporaries performing their duties under the Ministry of Law and Justice Division and serving in the Courts subordinate to Sindh High Court, Karachi and Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, have already been granted the relief prayed for in this petition. The same relief cannot be withheld in case of the petitioners; that the judgments passed in above referred cases, are in fact, the judgments in rem and confer same rights to the petitioners and all the other performing similar duties under the Special Courts.

The petition is opposed by the Learned AAG and Standing Counsel. It is contended that the judgments, referred to above, by the learned counsel for the petitioners, are not judgments in rem. The same confer the prayed relief to those only who had come forward to seek the relief, contends that an I.C.A has already been filed in LHC, Lahore against the judgment dated 31-10-2012. They, however, concede that no injunctive order has been passed therein. They request that till the decision of the said I.C.A, this petition may be kept pending; that acceptance of this appeal will open a Pandora’s Box and will be a sever slash on the National Exchequer.

The contemporaries of the petitioners who had filed writ petition No. 20968/2009, at the Principal Seat of this Court, have vide judgment dated 31-10-2012, been granted the relief, as is prayed for in this petition. The same was the outcome of Writ Petition No. 536 of 2013, filed in IHC, Islamabad, which culminated in the judgment dated 21-03-2013. The judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 20968/2009 is a judgment in rem and the benefits conferred upon those petitioners should have also been extended to the present petitioners. There is no reason to refuse the instant petitioners the relief they are entitled to have. Mere pendency of an I.C.A does not put a legal restraint on this Court to adjudicate upon this petition. In these circumstances, relying upon the dictum laid down in the supra judgments, this petition is accepted. The petitioners are held entitled to the relief prayed for in terms of the judgment dated 31-10-2012, passed in Writ Petition No. 20968/2009 from the same date.

Special Courts Employees Pay LHC Rawalpindi Bench Decision 1
Special Courts Employees Pay LHC Rawalpindi Bench Decision 1
Special Courts Employees Pay LHC Rawalpindi Bench Decision 2
Special Courts Employees Pay LHC Rawalpindi Bench Decision 2

 

Related Articles

Leave a Reply