Mst. Rukhsana Kausar, PTC Teacher, Government Girls Middle School
The petitioner, a PTC teacher, sought leave to appeal against a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which upheld the withdrawal of her selection grade (BS-10) and the subsequent recovery order. The core legal question was whether the withdrawal of the selection grade violated the principle of locus poenitentiae, given that the petitioner had previously been granted the grade. The Supreme Court examined the findings of the Tribunal, which determined that the petitioner lacked the necessary seniority to qualify for the selection grade and had obtained it through extraneous influence. The Court held that because the initial grant of the selection grade was illegal, the authority was not barred from withdrawing it, as the principle of locus poenitentiae does not protect benefits obtained through improper means. Consequently, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to permit the withdrawal of the grade while affirming the Tribunal's order setting aside the recovery of funds already paid. Leave to appeal was refused, as no valid grounds for interference were established.
- Does the principle of locus poenitentiae protect a service benefit that was obtained through extraneous influence?
- Can an authority withdraw a selection grade if the initial grant of that grade was illegal?
- Is a service benefit granted without the requisite seniority subject to withdrawal?
KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J- The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Tribunal") dated 21.11.2002 passed in her Appeal No. 1322 of 2002.
2. It is asserted by learned counsel for the petitioner that she is a PTC teacher and was awarded regular grade with effect from 15.5.1989. Vide order, dated 8.11.1999 the petitioner was awarded selection grade (BS-10) with effect. From. 27.12.1995. Vide order dated 7.2.2002 the selection grade was withdrawn and the amount received by the petitioner was directed to be recovered from her.
Aggrieved against the withdrawal, the petitioner filed a departmental appeal. As the same was not decided within ninety days the petitioner approached the Tribunal.
3. It is contended by learned counsel that' the withdrawal of, selection grade is violative of the principle of locus Poenitentiae in as much as the petitioner alongwith number of other teachers were enjoying selection grade. The Tribunal has found that as a matter of fact the petitioner was not senior enough to qualify for the selection grade, It has also found that in the circumstances the petitioner had managed to obtain the selection grade by bringing extraneous influence. We asked the learned counsel to justify the grant of selection grad. He has not been able to satisfy us on this score. The finding and conclusion of the learned Tribunal has therefore, to be uphold. If the grant of selection grade was illegal, there was no bar to its withdrawal. The Tribunal has already set aside the departmental order of recovery. We feel that in the circumstances of the case, this direction cannot be said to be improper.
4. No ground for our interference has been shown to exist. Resultantly, this petition is hereby dismissed and leave is refused.