Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1130 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNALBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD ANAYE

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

Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1130 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNALBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD ANAYET GONDAL VS The REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE S.5---appeal before the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal---Reinstatement into service---Back benefits---Entitlement to---Judicial officer was reinstated from the date of his dismissal---Representation of the appellant (reinstated judicial officer) for grant of back benefits, while treating the intervening period as period spent on duty, was declined---Stance of the appellant was that he was not employed for gain during the intervening period, rather his request to practice as an advocate was also declined by the authority, therefore, he was entitled for grant of back benefits---Validity---appellant had been reinstated into service from the date of his dismissal, however, the authority did not pass any order regarding intervening period and consequent benefits---Back benefits were to be granted for the intervening period, during which an employee remained out of service and did not engage in any gainful profession---Concept of reinstatement into service with original seniority and back benefits is based on the established principle of jurisprudence that if an illegal action/wrong is struck down by the Court, as a consequence, it is also to be ensured that no undue harm is caused to any individual due to such illegality/wrong or as a result of delay in the redressal of his grievance---If, by virtue of a declaration given by the Court, a civil servant is to be treated as being still in service, he should also be given the consequential relief of the back benefits (including salary) for the period he was kept out of service as if he was actually performing duties---Grant of back benefits, in such situation, is a rule and denial of such benefits is an exception on the proof that such a person had remained gainfully employed during the intervening period---Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal directed the respondent (Registrar High Court) to disburse the financial back benefits of appellant---appeal for grant of back-benefits, was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1130 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNALBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD ANAYET GONDAL vs The REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE S — 2024 PLC(CS) 1130 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC