| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 2641 2006 SLD 2641 2006 SCMR 1133 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.3176-L of 2001., decision dated: 20-02-2004 (On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 16-7-2001 passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No.1833-L of 1998)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Petition No.3176-L of 2001., decision dated: 20-02-2004 (On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 16-7-2001 passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No.1833-L of 1998)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ZAFAR IQBAL
VS
HABIB BANK LTD. and another
Law:
Section:
Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)-------Ss. 2-A & 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Premature retirement---Golden Handshake Scheme, benefits of---Petitioner a bank employee filed an application on 10-5-1996, for premature retirement which' was accepted on 14-2-1998---Petitioner after his retirement wanted to have benefits of Golden Handshake Scheme, which were refused by the bank---Validity---Department did not allow the petitioner to withdraw his earlier request for premature retirement, therefore, petitioner was not entitled for any of the benefits of the Golden Handshake Scheme, which was introduced in the meantime---After submitting the application for premature retirement, the petitioner joined another Bank and had received salaries for the period of 19 months pending decision upon his application for premature retirement, therefore, he could neither claim benefits of salary etc. for such period nor benefit of Golden Handshake Scheme could be extended to him because it was announced when petitioner had already joined the other bank---Judgment passed by Service Tribunal admitted no interference by Supreme Court---Leave to appeal was refused. Mian Mehmood Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court' and Faiz-ur-Rehman, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th February, 2004. ORDER IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment, dated 17th July, 2001 passed by Federal Service Tribunal whereby Appeal No.1833-L of 1998 filed by petitioner has been dismissed. Concluding para. therefrom is reproduced hereinbelow:--- "We have heard the parties at some length, perused the documents available on record and this Tribunal regrets to observe that when the appellant tendered his premature retirement with his own free-will, the same was accepted by the respondent-Bank and the appellant got received his all retiring dues without any reservation, then how the appellant can be allowed to approbate and reprobate at the same breath? Obviously, no law of the land allowed the appellant to travel in two boats at the same time which he did. On one hand, during the service, he…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492