GENERAL MANAGER, THE PUNJAB PROVINCIAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. and another vs MUNTAZIR HUSSAIN SHAH
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against an order of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, which referred the respondent's case for payment of suspension allowance to the petitioner bank for expeditious decision. The petitioner bank contended that the respondent is not a government servant and is instead governed by the Banking Service Rules, 1986, under which he is being paid one-third of his basic pay plus full allowances, and that he is not entitled to government rules and regulations. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that it was unnecessary to record a finding on this plea, as the petitioner remained at liberty to raise all legal and factual points before the President of the Bank during the hearing pursuant to the High Court's order. The Court expressed confidence that such pleas would be considered justly, fairly, and in accordance with law after granting an opportunity of hearing to the respondent. Consequently, the counsel for the petitioner did not press the petition, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.
- Whether an employee of the Punjab Provincial Cooperative Bank Ltd. is entitled to suspension allowance under government rules and regulations?
- Can a petitioner raise legal and factual pleas before the competent authority pursuant to a High Court remand order regarding a suspension allowance?
- Whether a petition for leave to appeal is maintainable when the petitioner is granted liberty to agitate all grievances before the departmental authority?
ORDER
' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order dated 9-2- 1998 passed by the Lahore High Court, multan Bench in Writ Petition No,5759 of 1997, whereby the case of the respondent for payment of suspension allowance was referred to the petitioner with the direction to decide the case expeditiously preferably within a period of three months.
2. Mr. M. Ilyas, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently argued that the respondent is not a Government servant and he is governed by the service rules framed by the Bank duly approved by the Registrar, Cooperatives, Punjab, Lahore. He further argued, that according to Rule No,22 under "Head may and Allowances" Clause (J) of the Banking Service Rules, 1986. The respondent is being paid 1/3rd of his Basic Pay plus full allowances as admissible to him. He further argued that the respondent being not a government servant, is not entitled to get allowance according to Government rules and Regulations. This aspect of the matter, it is contended vehemently, has been overlooked by the leaned Judge in Chambers while passing the impugned order.
3. It is not necessary to record any finding on the plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Suffice it to say that the petitioner is at liberty raise all the points including the pleas raised before us, before the President of Bank at the time of hearing, pursuant to the impugned order of the High court. We have no doubt in our mind that the pleas available to the petitioner under the law and raised by him before the President, shall be considered justly fairly and in accordance with law, after providing an adequate opportunity being head to the respondent.
4. When faced with this, Mr. M. Ilyas Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, does not press the petition, which is disposed of accordingly.
Cited by 1 case
- Muhammad Ali Ansari vs Manzoor Ahmad Paracha K.L.R. 2015 Civil Cases 91