MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs PROVINCE OF SINDH Rr — 2024 SCMR 1689 SUPREME-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF VS PROVINCE OF SINDH Rr. 1.8(a) & 2.11(c)---Pension---Object, purpose and scope---Withholding of benefits---Absent without leave---Petitioner/civil servant was aggrieved of order passed by authorities withholding pensionary benefits on the ground of his absence from duty without leave---Order of the authorities was maintained by High Court---Validity---Pension articulates payment of fixed amount, according to scheme of pension in accordance with law, rules and regulations, or pension scheme in vogue, which is recompensed on regular basis to a person on his superannuation---Foremost and predominant strength of mind is to afford and safeguard economic refuge and shelter and recuperate old age security---In general phenomena, superannuation or stepping down is considered a second innings in which a retired person aspires to live up to his highly anticipated imaginings or dreams and devote time to his kith and kin and friends---After retirement, timely payment of pension is considered as main source of income or livelihood---Despite serving for a long time with sheer commitment, if pensionary benefits are delayed or denied without any lawful justification or without assigning any reason or providing any opportunity of hearing, it would be a very sorry state of affairs, rather an appalling and deplorable situation for a person who performed his duties with utmost dedication and enthusiasm throughout his career but at the eve of his retirement, he was treated inhumanly, coldheartedly and gets nothing on the pretext of totally misconceived interpretation of some rule---Pension could not have been denied to petitioner/civil servant without issuing show cause notice and providing opportunity of hearing---Petitioner/civil servant was deprived of his pensionary benefits despite serving the department for at least 24 years, 05 months and 15 days without adjustment of his earned leaves---Payment of pensionary benefits are protected under the law, rules and regulations, even in private sector, where scheme of pension in vogue is according to the organizational/management policy---Where pension is payable, it is a vested right and not charity, alms or donation by the employer, but a compensation of services rendered assiduously by giving blood, sweat, toil and tears---Supreme Court set aside order passed by High Court and the authorities ensured payment of pension to petitioner/civil servant---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed.

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs PROVINCE OF SINDH Rr — 2024 SCMR 1689 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR