RASHID MEHMOOD GULL vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretariat Establishment Division (Sacked Employees Review Board), Islamabad Ss — 2023 PLC(CS) 1214 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2023 PLC(CS) 1214 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2023
Reporter: PLC
Parties: RASHID MEHMOOD GULL vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretariat Establishment Division (Sacked Employees Review Board), Islamabad Ss
Subject matter: Service
Provisions referred to: S. 4; S. 16

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

RASHID MEHMOOD GULL VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretariat Establishment Division (Sacked Employees Review Board), Islamabad Ss. 4(a) & 16 ---Re-instatement of sacked employee into service---Seniority, back benefits and compensation, entitlement to---Scope---Sacked Employees Review Board reinstated the bank employee but refused his claims of seniority and back benefits---Bank employee invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, however, the Single Bench declined his prayer for grant of seniority and back benefits---Held, that the appellant (bank employee) was reinstated under the provisions of the Sacked Employees(Re-instatement) Act, 2010 ('the Act, 2010'), after almost seventeen years from his discontinuance from services of respondent/bank and as per S. 4(a) of the Act, 2010, he was also entitled to be regularized in regular service of respondent/bank on one scale higher to the substantive scale/grade held by him at the time of his termination from service, and, thus, the same was not a matter of mercy---Section 16(1) of the Act, 2010 stipulated that a sacked employee was entitled to be paid compensation by the employer equal to gross monthly emolument of three years, at the rate of monthly pay and allowances payable at the time of disbursement of installment for the relevant post/grade in which the sacked employee was being re-instated or regularized, if already taken back in service---Appellant was also entitled to compensation in view of methodology stipulated in S. 16 of the Act, 2010---Impugned order passed by the Single Judge was set-aside---Intra-Court Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLC

2023 PLC(CS) 605 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHRASHEED AHMED VS PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED O.II, R.2---"Cause of action"---Connotation---Expression "cause of action" means…
2023 PLC(CS) 1119 SUPREME-COURTDIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, POSTAL SERVICES, D.G. KHAN VS NADEEM RAZA Misappropriation or embezzlement of public funds---Moral turpitude---Sc…
2023 PLC(CS) 1119 SUPREME-COURTDIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, POSTAL SERVICES, D.G. KHAN VS NADEEM RAZA S. 5---Service Tribunal, powers of---Scope---Under Section 5 of the Ser…
2023 PLC(CS) 928 SUPREME-COURTFEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman Federal Board of Revenue FBR House, Islamabad VS ZAHID MALIK all judicial, quasi-judicial and admini…
2023 PLC(CS) 928 SUPREME-COURTFEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman Federal Board of Revenue FBR House, Islamabad VS ZAHID MALIK Remand of a case to the lower fora---Sc…
2023 PLC(CS) 860 SUPREME-COURTAMANULLAH KHAN VS HOSPITAL DIRECTOR, KTH (MTI), PESHAWAR Upgradation of a post---Scope---In order to justify the upgradation, the Government…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English