Pakistan Case Law
1995 SCMR 34

In re: ANONYMOUS POLICE EMPLOYEES OF BALOCHISTAN (SERVILE MATTER) vs

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1995 SCMR 34
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Human Rights Case No, 14 of 1992
Date1994-02-08
Judge(s)Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, Shafi-ur-Rehman, Wali Muhammad Khan
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a service-related grievance involving police employees of the Government of Balochistan regarding pension liabilities. The core legal question addressed was whether the provincial government would accept and honor the pension claims of these employees. The Supreme Court of Pakistan disposed of the matter after the Advocate-General of Balochistan presented minutes from a government meeting held on October 4, 1992. In these minutes, the Government of Balochistan formally resolved not to refuse the pension liability of the employees in any case. Consequently, the Court found the grievance resolved by the government's policy decision. The Court directed the Advocate-General to submit a copy of the formal order issued by the government to implement this decision, thereby concluding the proceedings based on the government's undertaking to fulfill its pension obligations.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the Government of Balochistan accept the pension liability of its police employees?
  • Can a service matter be disposed of based on a government's formal decision to accept liability?
pension liabilityservice mattergovernment policypolice employeesBalochistan

ORDER

1. Learned Advocate-General, Balochistan has submitted the minutes of the meeting held on 4-10- 1992 in which the Government of Balochistan has decided not to refuse the pension liability of the employees in any case.

2. ' In view of this position the case stands disposed of. Advocate-General, be asked to submit a copy of the formal order issued in this behalf by the Government.

Cited by 3 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.