Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 1916 2007 SLD 1916 2007 PLC 419
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.D-1683 of 2006, decision dated: 26-01-2007.
FAISAL ARAB AND MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED, 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

JAMIL AKHTAR SIDDIQUI and 978 others

VS

STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN and others JAMIL AKHTAR SIDDIQUI and 978 others vs STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN and others

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Civil service---Retirement under Voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme---Petitioners along with hundreds of other employees opted to retire under "Voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme" floated by employer/Bank---Option of petitioners was duly accepted by Bank and they were relieved from service---When employees who had opted for retirement under Voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme were still in service, the Bank issued circular whereby salary structure of employees was raised which was effective from about 15 days prior to date, petitioners were relieved---Employees who opted for retirement under the Scheme were given salary at the revised rate uptill their retirement, but upon their retirement Bank calculated their emoluments under the Scheme on the basis of pay that was applicable at the time of exercise of option under said Scheme and not on the basis of the last drawn salary---Representation of petitioners against said conduct of Bank having been rejected; they filed appeal before Federal Service Tribunal, which was also dismissed---Petitioners then filed appeal before Supreme Court which was allowed holding that all emoluments, including pension as well as other retirement allowances, would be computed on the basis of last drawn salary---Bank computed the benefits under the said Scheme on the basis of last drawn salary of only those employees who had taken the matter to the Supreme Court, but refused to extend such benefit to other employees on the ground that they had not agitated the matter in any court of law---Validity---Bank could not be permitted to apply the same Scheme differently to a group of employees who, though in the same position, but their emoluments were calculated less favourably than the others---Such treatment could only be regarded as discriminatory liable for interference by the High Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction---High Court held that benefits under the said Scheme had to be uniformly granted to all employees who opted to retire under the Scheme including petitioners, even though they had not agitated the matter earlier---As right sought in the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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