SHAHBAZ LATIF vs DIG, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, LAHORE S — 2025 PLC(CS) 1022 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.

SHAHBAZ LATIF VS DIG, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, LAHORE S. 70---Employment---Considerable length of service---Appointment later found to have been procured through misrepresentation---Dismissal from service---Retrospective recovery of salary---Scope---Doctrine of quantum meruit---Petitioner, after rendering services for fifteen years, was dismissed on account of defect in his initial appointment, and salaries received by him were also held recoverable---Validity---In the present case, the doctrine of quantum meruit finds clear and compelling application---This equitable principle permits reasonable compensation for services rendered where one party has knowingly accepted and benefited from the work of another, even in the absence of a valid or enforceable contract---For over fifteen years, the petitioner continuously performed duties that fulfilled institutional needs and was compensated accordingly---To retrospectively invalidate such remuneration despite the employer's full knowledge and acceptance of the services rendered would be contrary to the fundamental tenet that no person should unjustly enrich themselves at the expense of another---In the present case, it was the employer/ Department that stood to benefit unjustly---Said principle finds statutory recognition under Section 70 of the Contract Act, 1872---Therefore, even where an employment / appointment is found to be irregular, if the employee has continuously and faithfully discharged official functions and the employer has enjoyed the resulting benefit over a significant period, the doctrine of quantum meruit furnishes both a moral and legal basis to preclude retrospective recovery of salary---Labours that is not donated but knowingly accepted must be compensated regardless of technical infirmities in the appointment process---The recovery of salary for services lawfully and diligently performed is impermissible, notwithstanding defects in the initial appointment---Thus, the order for recovery in the present case was arbitrary, excessive, and in clear violation of equitable principles---Supreme Court set-aside the impugned judgment to the extent of recovery of salary from the petitioner, however, the petitioner's dismissal from service, on account of ineligibility at the time of appointment, would remain intact---Petition was converted into an appeal and was partially allowed accordingly.

SHAHBAZ LATIF vs DIG, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, LAHORE S — 2025 PLC(CS) 1022 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC