Dr. Syed ALI SANA BOKHARI vs CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUDGES OF THE LAHORE HIGH COURT/AUTHORITY Regln

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

Dr. Syed ALI SANA BOKHARI VS CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUDGES OF THE LAHORE HIGH COURT/AUTHORITY Regln. 371-a---Pensionary benefits, entitlement to---Fundamental right---Inquiry proceedings abating after attaining the age of superannuation---Scope---In consequence of conviction and sentence in contempt proceedings, appellant was dismissed from service---Service appeal was filed and during the pendency of service appeal, appellant reached the age of superannuation---Service appeal was decided in the manner that order of dismissal from service was set aside and matter was remanded for decision afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant---In post-remand proceedings, the appellant was granted hearing before the administrative Committee followed by issuance of notification, whereby the disciplinary proceedings against appellant were abated on the ground that he had already been superannuated---appellant approached the Registrar for the release of his pension and other service benefits, however his request was declined---Validity---Record showed that no adverse order existed against the appellant as order of his dismissal from service had already been set aside and the disciplinary proceedings to determine the question of 'moral turpitude' were also abated by the competent authority as during the course of proceedings, the appellant had reached the age of superannuation on 01.04.2004---Therefore, the respondent-authority was obligated to pass the further order by notionally permitting the appellant to retire from service on the date he had attained the age of superannuation i.e. 01.04.2004 besides considering the release of the retirement benefits to him, treating the disciplinary proceedings abated as if no punishment was ever awarded to the appellant---Even otherwise, in terms of office memorandum dated 26.02.1976, it was incumbent upon the respondent-authority to notify the retirement of its officers to all concerned for recovery of dues from them, if any, and to facilitate the payment of pension and other dues to them---appellant had served the Judiciary for a period of about 23-years---So in all fairness, when the pending disciplinary proceedings were abated and dismissal order was no more in the field, there was no justification in halting the retirement notification in favour of the appellant and withholding the payable pensionary benefits to him---Therefore, the inaction on the part of respondent-authority in that regard appeared to be totally unjustified and unwarranted---Thus, the impugned order dated 22.01.2022 was set aside being illegal and without lawful authority---Respondent-authority was directed to issue retirement notification of appellant and release the retirement benefits in his favour---appeal was allowed, accordingly.

Dr. Syed ALI SANA BOKHARI vs CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUDGES OF THE LAHORE HIGH COURT/AUTHORITY Regln — 2025 PLC(CS) 1427 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC