SHAHNAZ PARVEEN vs P.T.C.L. Through its President and others
The petitioner, an employee of Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL), challenged the acceptance of her option for the voluntary separation scheme (VSS) alleging fraud and coercion, claiming she opted out of fear that her services would otherwise be terminated. Her grievance petition before the Punjab Labour Court and her subsequent appeal before the Lahore High Court were both dismissed. The Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed the core legal question of whether the voluntariness of exercising an option for a retirement scheme can be adjudicated by the apex court. The Supreme Court held that the determination of whether an option was exercised voluntarily is a pure question of fact which had already been settled concurrently by the lower forums, and no question of law of public importance was involved. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, laying down the principle that concurrent findings of fact regarding the voluntary nature of a retirement scheme option will not be disturbed by the Supreme Court in the absence of material to substantiate allegations of coercion or fraud.
- Whether the question of whether an employee exercised an option for a voluntary separation scheme voluntarily is a question of fact?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower forums regarding a service dispute without any material substantiating fraud or coercion?
' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The petitioner, an employee of PTCL, exercised her option for the voluntary separation scheme (VSS), introduced by the management which was accepted by order, dated 28-1-2008. Latter, the petitioner took the plea that a fraud had been played upon her otherwise she would not have exercised her option. She, therefore, filed a grievance petition before the Punjab Labour Court No,1, Lahore, which was dismissed by order, dated 7-5-2008. Her Labour Appeal No,128 of 2008 was also dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
2. The learned counsel vehemently argued that the petitioner had exercised her option to avail the VSS retirement scheme only under a fear and threat that her services would be terminated. In such a situation she would have been left high and dry without payment of any benefits.
3. We have heard the learned counsel at length and have also perused the available record. The question whether the exercise of option by the petitioner was voluntary or otherwise cannot be decided by this Court being purely a question of fact. The controversy had already been set at rest by the Labour Court as well as the High Court. No question of law of public importance is involved in this case. It is too late before us to entertain and adjudicate upon the plea taken by the petitioner without there being any material to substantiate the same.
4. For the foregoing. Reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.
Leave to .