Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4845 = 2026 SLD 4845 = 2025 PLJ 437
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No. 2989 of 2024
Presented By: Muhammad Asif, J.
Mr. Muhammad Waqas Malik, Advocate for Petitioners. Ms. Shaista Tabassum, AAG for
Respondents No. 1 & 4. Mr. Muhammad Nazir Jawad, Advocate for
Respondents No. 2 & 3. Date of hearing: 30.4.2025.

ZAFAR ULLAH KHAN and 11 others--Petitioners

VERSUS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Federal Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and 2 others--Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 9, 199

Law: Rules of Business, 1973

Section: 12(16)

Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Arts. 9 & 199--Rules of Business, 1973, Para 12(16)--Public Sector Companies (Corporate Governance) Rules, 2013, R. 2(1)(g)--Petitioners were retired employees of PTVC--Withholding  of commutation amount--Right to receive pension--Public sector company--Question of--Whether denial of commutation amounts by PTVC to petitioners retired employees of corporation, is lawful and sustainable in eyes of law--Discrimination--Entitlement--Direction to--Responsibility to fulfill procedural formalities lies squarely with management of PTVC, and not with retiring employees--Until such time Pension Rules are formally repealed or amended in accordance with law, they continue to remain operative and binding upon PTVC--Denial of commutation amount (pensionary benefit), by Respondent No. 4 (Finance Division) on above pretext and by Respondent No. 2 & 3 on pretext of an ongoing financial crisis was also both arbitrary and unjust and it also amounts to unfair discrimination and violates settled principles of fairness, equality, and legitimate expectation--Right to receive pension and its allied benefits, including commutation, is not merely a statutory entitlement but forms part of fundamental right to life as envisaged under Article 9 of Constitution--A retired employee, upon superannuation, is ordinarily bereft of alternate sources of income and was wholly dependent on pension for sustenance, dignity, and survival--It is a settled proposition of constitutional jurisprudence that right to life inherently encompasses right to livelihood--Consequently, this right could not be subjected to whims, discretion, or arbitrary inclinations of those in positions of authority--Core grievance of petitioners appears to be well-founded--It is a settled principle that upon superannuation or retirement, pensionary entitlements of an employee, including commutation, must be processed during service and disbursed promptly upon retirement, without any unwarranted delay--Consequently right of commutation amount is now vested in favour of petitioners, and they are entitled to its release--Petition…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register