Mst. SAFIA BANO vs EDO (EDU) and another
The petitioner, a civil servant with thirty-three years of service, sought leave to appeal against a judgment dismissing her service appeal. The petitioner had voluntarily applied for pre-mature retirement, which was accepted by the Education Department. Subsequently, she attempted to retract or modify the effective date of her retirement and later sought to withdraw her retirement application entirely to continue service until her superannuation date. These requests were rejected by the department and subsequently by the Service Tribunal. The Supreme Court examined whether the Tribunal's decision contained any illegality or involved a question of public importance. The Court held that since the petitioner had already been retired from service pursuant to her initial voluntary application, no illegality was committed by the Tribunal in dismissing her appeal. Furthermore, the Court determined that the petition did not raise any question of public importance as required under the constitutional jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and leave to appeal was declined.
- Does a petition seeking to retract a voluntary retirement application after its acceptance by the competent authority raise a question of public importance under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973?
- Can a civil servant unilaterally withdraw or modify a voluntary retirement application after it has been formally accepted by the employer?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 8-5-2003, whereby the petitioner's appeal was dismissed.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner for quite some time and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. We are not giving the facts in detail as the same have elaborately been narrated in the impugned judgment. Admittedly the petitioner who had 33 years of service at her credit made an application to the Secretary to the Government of Punjab Education Department on 8-3-2002 seeking pre-mature retirement w,e,f, 31-5-2002 due to her personal circumstances. Her application was accepted on 16-5-2002. Subsequently after the receipt of the acceptance letter she made an application on 21-5-2002 that her date of retirement be changed from 31-5-2002 to 31-8-2002. Against another -application was given on 4-10-2002 wherein she prayed that she be allowed to complete her service according to her date of birth which is 12-2-1944. All these applications were rejected. She thereafter approached the Tribunal whereto she met the same fate.
2. We are of the considered view that no illegality has been committed by the learned Tribunal in dismissing appeal as she had already been retired from service. Even otherwise no question of public importance as envisaged under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic of Republic of Pakistan is involved.
3. For what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any force is hereby dismissed. Leave to appeal is declined.