Pakistan Case Law
2003 SCMR 726

ASGHAR ALI vs DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BAHAWALNAGAR and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2003 SCMR 726
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeal No,503 of 1999
Date2002-05-20
Judge(s)Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, Hamid Ali Mirza and Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan
Authored byNazim Hussain Siddiqui
ResultAppeal allowed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This appeal by leave of the Supreme Court of Pakistan is directed against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appellant's service appeal was allowed, resulting in his reinstatement after compulsory retirement, though the intervening period was ordered to be treated as leave of the kind due rather than granting back benefits. The core legal question was whether a civil servant whose retirement is found to be unlawful is entitled to all back benefits for the intervening period. The Supreme Court, upon concession by the respondents' counsel and in light of precedent holding that unjustified removal or retirement warrants back benefits, allowed the appeal. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order to the extent of denying back benefits and held that the appellant was entitled to all back benefits from the date of his retirement to the date of his reinstatement.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether an employee whose retirement is found to be unlawful is entitled to back benefits for the intervening period?
  • Does the denial of back benefits by a Service Tribunal sustain when the underlying removal or retirement is declared unjustified?
back benefitscompulsory retirementservice appealreinstatementcivil servant

' NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J.---This appeal by leave of this Court is directed against the judgment, dated 15-11-1997 of learned Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, hereinafter referred to "the Tribunal", whereby Appeal No,831/1995 filed by the appellant was allowed and he was reinstated in service and period intervened between dismissal and reinstatement was ordered to be treated as leave of the kind due.

2. The facts relevant for decision of this appeal are that the appellant was employed as a Junior Clerk in Civil Court, Bhawalnagar and on 29-6-1994 he was compulsorily retired. He successfully challenged above order before Tribunal through Appeal, which was allowed.

3. Vide order, dated 21-4-1999, leave to appeal was granted to consider whether he was entitled to all back benefit when his said retirement was found against law.

4. Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned counsel for the respondents concedes the case of the appellant. He states that in view of the case reported as Ali Nawaz v. Pakistan Railways through Chairman/Secretary and others (1999 SCM R 1873), the appellant is entitled to back benefits from the date of his removal to the date of his reinstatement. In the above reported case, the removal of the petitioner of said case was found unjustified and it was held that Service Tribunal was not right in denying back benefits in such circumstances.

5. In consequence, we allow this appeal, set aside the order of the Tribunal only to the extent of back benefits, and order that all back benefits shall be paid to the appellant from the date of his retirement to the date of his reinstatement.

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.