Dr. Syed ABUL HASSAN NAJMEE vs GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB and others
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's claim for the simultaneous payment of both an LL.M. special allowance and a Ph.D. allowance. The petitioner, a member of the Provincial Civil Services (Judicial Branch), contended that his LL.M. and Ph.D. qualifications were distinct and independent, thereby entitling him to receive both allowances concurrently. The core legal question was whether the petitioner possessed a vested right to claim the LL.M. special allowance in addition to the Ph.D. allowance under the prevailing government policy. The Supreme Court held that there was no rule or policy decision supporting the petitioner's claim for cumulative allowances. The Court observed that the government, through its circular letter dated 11-2-1993, had effectively neutralized the earlier circular letter of 20-9-1990, thereby precluding the simultaneous receipt of both allowances. Consequently, the Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, finding no merit in the petition. The key principle established is that in the absence of an express rule or policy, a civil servant cannot claim multiple educational allowances concurrently if the government has validly restricted such payments.
- Is a civil servant entitled to receive both an LL.M. special allowance and a Ph.D. allowance simultaneously in the absence of an express government policy?
- Can a government circular letter effectively supersede or neutralize a previous policy regarding the payment of educational allowances?
' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.-The petitioner seeks the grant of leave from the judgment dated 18-12-1998 passed by the Punjab .Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal at Lahore High Court, Lahore in Service Appeal No,7 of 1993.
2. The petitioner, a Member of the former Provincial Civil Services (Judicial Branch), is at present posted as Secretary, Provincial Assembly of the Punjab. The petitioner after obtaining the LL.M.
Degree in 1985 also qualified his Ph.D. (Constitutional Law) in 1992. The petitioner was sanctioned special allowance @ 50% per month of the Ph.D. Allowance on the basis of LL.M. Degree in terms of a circular letter, dated 20-9-1990 issued by the Government of the Punjab, Finance Department.
Subsequently, he was allowed Ph.D. Allowance at the rate of Rs,1,500 per month, with effect from 22- 11-1992, by the Government of the Punjab vide Order No,E-II.23-6/85, dated 11/17 February 1993 read with Finance Department's Circular Letter No,FD-SRI-9-3/86, dated 20-7-1988 with a further rider that the qualification allowance already sanctioned in his favour would cease to be admissible. His representation for the grant of special allowance for LL.M. In addition to Ph.D. Allowance was dismissed by the Government vide letter dated 21-8-1993. The service appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed by the impugned order of the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the qualifications of LL.M. And Ph.D. Were distinct and independent and there was no question of their amalgamation. The petitioner was entitled to the Ph.D. Allowance in addition to the special allowance for his LL.M . Degree.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. We find that there is no rule or policy decision of the Government which entitles the petitioner to the special allowance for LL.M.
Degree in addition to the Ph.D. Allowance. By placing a rider by Circular Letter dated 11-2-1993 the Government seems to have neutralized its earlier letter dated 20-9-1990. The view taken by the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal is reasonable and unexceptionable in the facts and circumstances. This is not a fit case for grant of leave.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs.