2025 PLC(CS) 1516 PESHAWAR-HIGH-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 ANWAR KHAN VS VICE-CHANCELLOR/GOVERNER SYNDICATE through Registrar, the University of Agriculture, Peshawar Post on ad hoc basis, holding of---Advance increments granted during the course of holding ad hoc post, recovery of---Advance increments wrongly sanctioned by authorities, plea of---Scope and effect---Where payments were made due to erroneous orders, recovery from employees would be unjustified in the absence of any allegation of fraud or misconduct in securing such orders---Petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Editor/Lecturer on 02.01.1993, he was, however, appointed vide order dated 13.06.1993 on ad hoc basis and thereafter he continued in the said capacity till 11.06.1996 after being regularized in service---At the relevant time when he was holding the post on ad hoc basis he was granted advance increments---During the course of his service the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor and was subsequently promoted to Associate Professor and then Professor before he reached the age of superannuation---While preparing the pension papers of the petitioner it was objected that during the period from June 1993 till June 1996 he was wrongly granted advance increments, and as such, recovery was ordered from his pension --Petitioner being aggrieved approached the respondents and filed an appeal but to no avail, hence filed the present Constitutional petition---The only issue involved in the present petition was as to "whether the petitioner during the period of holding the post on ad hoc basis in the respondent university was entitled to the advance increments w.e.f 13.06.1993 to 22.04.1996?"---Held: The ad hoc services of the petitioner were considered as countable for the purpose of pension, as such, under no circumstances the validly drawn advance increments could be ordered to be recovered after about three decades---Moreover, where certain amount was paid on account of incorrect orders, perpetual benefits though could not be granted, albeit, no recovery could be effected from such employees when there was no allegation that such an employee had either played fraud or made manipulation in obtaining such orders---Impugned order, whereby, recovery of advance increments was ordered from pension of the petitioner was illegal and without legal authority and of no legal effect---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC