MUHAMMAD DIN AND ANOTHER Versus SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUNJAB HEALTH DEPTT.

ORDER

1. SAAD SAOOD JAN (CHAIRMAN). ‑.The appellants were working as Attendants in Government Mental Hospital, Lahore. On diverse dates in 1967 and 1968, their services were terminated. In 1971, on their representa tions, they were re‑appointed as Attendants. Their orders of re‑appointment clearly stated that they were to be treated as fresh recruits. On their further representations the breaks in their services were condoned for the purposes of pensionary benefits alone. However, their claim that they should be allowed arrears of pay during the periods of break was rejected. They have come to assert their claim for arrears of pay.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to show that the orders of the termination of their services were either mala fide or tainted with any other irregularity. Consequently, they cannot claim, as a matter of right, the pay for the periods during which they remained out of job. The fact that the Government has condoned the breaks in their services for purposes of pensionary benefits does not necessarily imply that the Government has accepted their contention that their services had been earlier illegally terminated. The condonation of the breaks in service was neither founded on contract nor on any provision of law but was in the nature of a concession granted to them by the Government and as such they cannot ask that a further concession by way of payment of salaries for the periods of breaks should also be given to them.

3. The appeal is without any force and is hereby dismissed in limine.