2025 PLC(CS) 1204 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

Mst. RAZIA BIBI VS PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED No court can dismiss a lis on the ground of laches if it defeats the cause of justice and thereby perpetuates an injustice---Bar of laches cannot be over emphasized in a case where the relief claimed is based on a recurring cause of action. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1204 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Mst. RAZIA BIBI VS PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED Ss. 11, 13, 17, 18 & 19---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Federal Government Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance Rules, 1972, R.12---Group insurance and benevolent fund, payment of---Widow, right of---Entitlement---Laches, applicability of---Exception---Recurring cause of action---Petitioner (widow of deceased employee) instituted the present Constitutional petition seeking release of benevolent grant, group insurance and pensionary benefits arising from the services of her deceased husband, who joined the respondent company in 1982 and retired in 2008 under the Voluntary Surrender of Service (VSS) Scheme, in pursuance of which he was paid under the VSS agreement, but monthly pension was denied on the ground that he fell short of the 20 years qualifying service requirement---He had served 19 years and 7 months in regular service---Respondent company later introduced a 'separation bonus scheme' for employees falling short of 20 years, which was credited to his account---After death of petitioner's husband in 2015, petitioner (widow) filed the present petition upon rejection of pensionary claims by respondent company by asserting that the shortfall of months should have been condoned and that she was entitled to benevolent grant and group insurance---Held: Case of the petitioner (widow) fell in the same category of case which had been decided by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2506 of 2016 whereby the Supreme Court held that the appellants had no valid grievance as they had voluntarily opted for the VSS (Voluntary Separation Scheme), accepted the separation bonus (which was only available to those with less than 20 years of qualifying service), and signed the waiver forms; they did not disclose the said facts in their petitions, which amounted to a non-disclosure of material facts; that if the appellants truly believed they had completed 20 years of service and were entitled to pension, they should not have accepted the separation bonus or should have refunded it before pursuing pension claims; that their conduct barred them from seeking pension under the doctrine of estoppel---Whereas, provisions of the Federal Employees Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance Act, 1969 (the "Act 1969") entitled the petitioner to receive benevolent grant for her life for a period starting from date of death of her husband as he died after retirement but before attaining the age of seventy years---Petitioner was also entitled to receive sum assured on account of premium contributed towards group insurance in terms of Ss. 13 & 19 of the Act, 1969---With respect to the objection regarding applicability of laches in the present petition allegedly being filed after 12 years of VSS agreement, same was without force for the reason that doctrine of laches could not applied in every case as a hard and fast rule without examining dictates of justice, equity and fair play---In the present case, respondent Nos.1 to 3 were required to act fairly and justly to discharge their duties by forwarding the application of petitioner for payment of benevolent grant and group insurance if found entitled and inaction on the part of respondents to act upon application filed by the petitioner created a recurring cause of action in her favour for which no limitation applied---In the present case there was a recurring cause of action for the petitioner to knock at the doors of justice and petitioner could not be dismissed on account of mere delay---Petitioner being widow of deceased employee was entitled to receive benevolent grant for life, she was also entitled for grant of group insurance for the sum assured against the life of her deceased husband---Petitioner failed to make out a case for grant of monthly pension---Constitutional petition was partly allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1204 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Mst. RAZIA BIBI VS PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED If public functionary fails to act upon the application filed by the applicant, such inaction would create recurring cause of action in favour of the applicant for which no limitation would apply.

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC