Malik MUHAMMAD ASLAM AWAN Versus EMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFIT INSTITUTION through Chairman, E.O.B.I.
ORDER
SAYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J.--- Concisely facts of the case as unfolded in petition are that petitioner was employed by the Employees Old-Age Benefit Institution, a statutory corporate body established by the Employees Old-Age Benefits Act, 1976, for the purposes of providing pensionary benefits to the workers. Petitioner retired from employment on 14-7-1999. The Federal Government increased the pension of the civil pensioners with effect from July 1, 1999. The petitioner claimed that he was entitled to that increase and consequently he approached the concerned departmental authority. The request was rejected vide order dated November 23, 2005. Being aggrieved by the order petitioner filed Service Appeal No.771(L)(C.S.) of 2005 before the Federal Service Tribunal. In terms of the order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam's case PLD 2006 SC 602, the Service Tribunal vide notice dated 22-7-2006 informed the petitioner that his appeal had abated with effect from 27-6-2006. Thereafter the petitioner filed the present petition.
2. Petitioner appeared in person and has argued that EOBI revised cases upon such revision by the Federal Government: He has further argued that giving increase to those who retired prior to 1-7-1999 and not to those who retired on or after 1,;7-1999, amounts to discrimination.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has firstly argued that since the petitioner himself has provided the address of respondents of Karachi, this Honourable Court lacks territorial jurisdiction. He has secondly argued that the respondent institution is not department of Federal Government and, therefore increase allowed by 'the Federal Government to its employees is not by its own force applicable to the employees of the Institution. He further argued that pay scales of the institution and other terms and conditions of the employees of the institution, are totally different from the pay scales and terms and conditions of the Federal Government.
4. I have perused the record and given my anxious consideration to the facts pleaded and the documents appended.
5. The order, impugned in this petition; was no doubt issued in Karachi but it was issued to the petitioner at his address at Lahore. Moreover, the service appeal filed by the petitioner, before the Lahore Bench of Federal Service Tribunal. It is the appeal, which has been held abated in the terms of order dated 22-7-2006. Therefore, the cause of action i.e. impugned order started when the letter was issued from Karachi but continued when the letter was served at Lahore. Consequently the objection in respect of territorial jurisdiction is overruled.
6. The circular through which the Federal Government granted pension increase to its employees is a short order and reads as under :---
"The president has been pleased to allow increase in pension with effect from 1st July, 1999 to civil pensioners of the Federal Government including civil and paid from defence estimates at the following rates."
Perusal of the circular indicated that President has allowed increase with effect from 1st July, 1999 to civil pensioners of the Federal Government. Obviously the beneficiary must be a civil pensioner on July 1, 1999, only then he would be entitled to increase in pension. If he is not a pensioner then increase will not be applicable to him. It is pertinent to note that salaries of the serving employees were also increased on 1-7-1999 and consequently petitioner's salary was also increased from Rs.13,018, in June, 1999 to Rs.15,950 with effect from July 1, 1999. There cannot be any manner of doubt that this increase was given to the employees who were serving on 1-7-1999. The petitioner cannot be allowed to claim to benefits of salary increase as an employee on 1-7-1999 and then the increase in pension with effect from the same date.
7. In view of the above discussion, the petition does not contain any merit and is consequently dismissed.
S. A.K. /M-373/L Petition dismisse