Note of dated 16-4-18 in Urdu
نوٹ :- میں نے مندرجہ زیل فیس بک پر اور واٹس ایپس پر سپریم کوڑٹ کا 3 اپریل 2018 کو بنکوں کی رویو پٹیشنس مسترد کرنے کا فیصلہ اپلوڈ کیا تھا . مجھے کہا گیا کے اسکا ترجمعہ اردو میں کرکے بتائیں میں مختصرن ھی اب یہ بتا سکتا ھوں کے میرے اس بنکوں والے کیس کا اپلوڈ کرنے کا مقصد صرف یہ تھا کے میں کچھ قانونی حقائیق بتانا چاھتا تھا اپنےان وی ایس ایس لے کر ریٹائڑمنٹ لینے والے پنشنرس اور خاصکر جو بغیر پنشن کے زبردستی وی ایس ایس میں لینے پر مجبورھوئے انکو میرے اس بنکوں والے کیس کا اپلوڈ کرنے کا مقصد صرف یہ تھا کے میں کچھ قانونی حقائیق بتانا چاھتا تھا اپنےان وی ایس ایس لے کر ریٹائڑمنٹ لینے والے پنشنرس اور خاصکر جو بغیر پنشن کے زبردستی وی ایس ایس میں لینے پر مجبورھوئے انکوسپریم کوڑٹ کے تین رکنی بینچ نے اپنے اس 13 فروری 2018 میں از خود پنشن ، بنک کے ریٹآئڑڈ ملازمین کی مقرر کردی تھی جو کم ازکم 8000 روپے ماھوار کی گئی ہے . جبکے پہلے انکو بہت ھی کم دی جارھی تھی کسی کو ڈھآئی سو روپے ماھوار مل رھے تھے کسی کو پانچ سو وغیرہ وغیرہ. بنکوں نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف رویو اپیل کردی جو سپریم کوڑٹ کے اس تین رکنی بینچ جس کے سربراہ محترم جناب چیف جسٹس ثاقب نثار تھے ، مسترد کردی . اس فیصلے سپرکم کوڑٹ نے بڑے کام کی ایک رولنگ دے دی و اسکے پیرا 3 کے آخر میں موجود ھے. جو خاصکر ان وی ایس ایس لے کر ريٹائڑڈ ھونے والے ملازمین ے لئے بیحد فا ئدہ مند ھے جن کو دس سال یا اس ھی زیادہ کوالفائیڈ سروس ھونے کے باوجود پی ٹی سی ایل نے پنشن نہیں دی . عدالت عظمی نے اپنے اس فیصلے کے پیرا 3 کے آخر میں لکھا ھے . یہ وضاحت کی جاتی ھے یہ کے جو پنشن کا فائدہ ھم نے اپنے 13 فروری 2018 کے فیصلے میں دیاتھا، وہ ان بنک کے ان 10 اکتوبر 1997 کو 5416 بنک سے نکالے ھوئے ملازمین کو بھی یا جائے گا جنکو سٹاف میں کمی کرنے کی سکیم کی وجہ سے نکالا گیاتھا، اگر انکی کوالیفائیڈ سروس بنک سے نکالے ھوئی تاریخ تک دس سال کی بنتی ھو ". عدالت عظمی کے اس حکم سے یہ بات صاف ظاھر ھوجاتی ھے " کے دس سال یا اس سے زیادہ کی کوالفائیڈ سروس کرنے والا ھر گورنمنٹ یا سیمی گورنمنٹ کا سرکاری ملازم ریٹائڑڈ ھونے والا ملازم یا ایسا ملازم جسکی سروس ختم کردی ھو ، پنشن کا حقدار بن جاتا ھے [ یاد رھے صرف نوکری ڈسمس ھونے والے سرکاری ملازم کو چاھے اسکی کوالیفائیڈ سروس کتنی کیوں نہ ھو اسکو پنشن قانونن نہیں د یجاتی] . عدالت عظمی کا یہ حکم ان وی ایس ایس میں بغیر پنشن کے ریٹآئڑڈپی ٹی سی ایل کے ملازمین کے لئے بیحد حوصلہ افزا ھے جنکی سروس دس سال یا اس سے بھی کہیں زیادہ تھی لیکن بیس سال سے کم تھی . ھائی کوڑٹوں میں ان لوگوں کے کیسس سرد مہری کا شکا ر ھیں . ھائی کوڑٹیں فیصلہ ھی نہیں کررھی ھیں . میرے کہنے پر غلام سرور اور دیگر نان پنشنرس وی ایس ایس ریٹائریز نے اسلام آباد ھائی کوڑٹ میں دائیر کی تھی 2016 جون می جسکا یعنی 2114/2016 WP کا فیصلہ 28 فروری سے ابتک محفوظ ھے معزز جج صاحب فیصلہ لکھ ھی نہیں پارھے . اب تو سپریم کوڑٹ کے واضح حکم کے تحت انکو ان تمام نان پنشنرس پٹیشنرس ، جنکی کوالفائیڈ سروس دس سال سے بھی کہیں زیادہ ھے . جب 10 اکتوبر 1997 سے بنکوں سے نکالے گئے ملازمین کو ، جنکی کوالکفائیڈ سروس دس سال تھی انکو پنشن مل سکتی ھے عدالت عظمی کے جکم پر تو ان مارچ 2008 میں وی ایس ایس لے کر ریٹائڑڈ ھونے والے پی ٹی سی ایل کے ملازمین کو جنکی سروس دس سال یا اس سے بھی زیادہ تھی مگر بیس سال سے کم ، انکو کیوں پنشن نہیں مل سکتی . اس پپرا 3 میں عدالت عظمی نے بنک کے وکیل کی ایما پر یہ بات واضح کردی کے گولڈن شیک ھینڈ لے کر ریٹائڑڈ ھونے والوں کو یہ پنشن انکریز نہیں مل سکتا. یہ فیصلہ عدالت عظمی نے انکے وکیل کی ایما پر دیا مگر یاد رکھیں اس کا اثر پی ٹی سی ایل کے ان پنشنروں پر کبھی نہیں پڑ سکتا اسکی وجہ یہ ھے کے پی ٹی ای ٹی نے اپنی رویو پٹیشن میں یہ بات نہیں اٹھائی تھی اور نہ ھی انکے وکیل خالد انور نے یہ اعتراز کیا تھا اور وی ایس ایس لےکر ریٹائڑڈ ھونے والوں کو یہ گورنمنٹ والی انکریز نہيں دی جاسکتی . وہ اٹھاتے بھی کیسے وہ تو یہ چاھتے تھ کے کسی کو بھی نہ ملے. پھر عدالت ععظمی نے اپنے یکم نومبر 2017 کے فیصلے میں یہ بات اچھی طرح واضح کردی کے عدالت نے کہیں بھی یہ حکم نہیں دیا کے ان وی ایس ایس لے کر ریٹائڑڈ ھونے والوں کو یہ انکریز پنشن میں نہ دیا جائے .اگر یہ بات ھوتی تو سپریم کوڑٹ صادق علی کی توھین عدالت کا کیس کیوں ھی سنتی کیونکے صادق علی تو بھی 2008 کا وی ایس ایس ر یٹائیڑی ھے . تو ایسے لوگ بالکل پریشان نہ ھوں اور نہ ایسی کسی بات پر دھیان نہ دیں کے فلاں فیصلے میں یہ سپریم کوڑٹ کاحکم ھے . ایک بات ھمیشہ یاد رکھیں کے سپریم کوڑٹ نے پنشن انکریز کا آڈر ان سب ریٹائڑڈ ملازمین کے لئے دیا ھے " جو ٹی اینڈ ٹی میں بھرتی ھوئے پھر پی ٹی سی میں ٹرانسفڑڈ ھوکر ریٹائڑڈ ھوئے پھر پی ٹی سی ایل میں یکم جنوری 1996 کو ٹرانسفڑڈ ھوکر ریٹائڑڈ ھوئے کسی بھی وجہ سے ماسوائے وہ ڈس مس نوکری سے نہ ھوئے ھوں"
واسلام
محمد طارق اظہر
۱۸ اپریل ۲۰۱۸
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/C.R.P._70_2018_dt_7_4_2018.pdf
Dear all VSS retired pensioners
A-o-A
Please see the recent decision in last Para-3 of HSCP in the C. R .P s of different banks on 13-04-2018 for the grant of pension to those 5416 UBL employees whose service had been terminated due to retrenchment by UBL on 10-10-1997 who had qualified service of ten years, according to bank service terms and conditions.
It is an example just to intimate all of you that the HSCP have set a ruling that those employees , whether have been retired or terminated , even though they are entitled of pension if their qualified service in any govt or semi organisations are ten years or more. Thos VSS Optees who have retired in 2008 or own wards without pension in spite of having qualified service of ten years or more , have rightly right to have pension as per GoP from the date of their such retirement under VSS without pension.
In this para the HSCP disallowed the pension increase to those UBL employees who accepted golden shake hand . HSCP disallowed the same on the request of UBL council Mr Salman Raja during review proceedings.But this can not be made any reference to those PTCL pensioners who opted the VSS and retired and also getting pension. Because neither PTET has raised this objection in their Review Appel against the HSCP order of dated 12-6-2015 that the GoP increase in pension can not be given to the retired employees under VSS nor their council Khalid Anwar raised the same objection during proceedings. Instead of it , the said council emphasised that due to acceptance of VSSs, the Service Terms of all such VSSs retirees are changed and they became company employees. Which is quite contrary the the judgement of 8 Honourable Judges in Masood Bhattie case is 2012 SCMR 152 and in review appeal of PTCL in PTCL vs Masood Bhattie & others which dismissed on 19-2-2016 reported in 2016 SCMR 1362. In Masood Bhattie case the HSCP has categorically clerified the the PTCL has no any power to alter the terms and conditions of such transferred employees in PTCL for their disadvantages and even Government of Pakistan is debarred to do so. So no one should be worried that the order passed by HSCP on the request of the council of UBL regarding non giving pension increase as fixed by the court to the retired employees of UBL bank under golden shake hand scheme can be implemented also on them. Be sure this order for only such UBL employees.It is only UBL specific. For VSS retired PTCL employees the HSCP clarified also the same in its order of 1-11-2017. Copy of the same is attached for your all information.
Regards
Tariq
16-4-2018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(REVIEW JURISDICTION)
PRESENT: MR. JUSTICE MIAN SAQIB NISAR, HCJ
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN
C.R.P.No.70/2018 in C.M.Appeal No.203/2016 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.71/2018 in C.M.A.No.2656/2017 in C.M.A.No.1253/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.72/2018 in C.M.A.No.8404/2016 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.82/2018 in C.M.A.No.8234/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.83/2018 in C.M.A.No.9312/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.84/2018 in C.M.A.No.9313/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.85/2018 in C.M.A.No.9314/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016 and C.M.A.No.2416/2018 in C.M.A.No.883/2018 in S.M.C.No.20/2016
(Against the judgment of this Court dated 13.02.2018)
Date of hearing 3-4-2018
ORDER
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, CJ.-
10:30 am
Recent review Ptetion for pension of bank
Our judgment dated 13.2.2018 has not been complied with till date. The review petitions though have been filed against the said judgment but no interim relief has been granted therein to suspend the judgment under review. Let the Chief Executive Officers of HBL, ABL, UBL and MCB be present in the Court at 6:30 p.m. today, or in lieu thereof, an undertaking be made by the said Banks to the effect that the judgment dated 13.2.2018 shall be complied with in letter and spirit. 6:30 p.m.:�2. Pursuant to our above order in the morning, Mr. Salman Aslam Butt, learned Sr. ASC present in Court has placed on the record the written undertakings on behalf of UBL and MCB, which are scanned as under:
3. On account of the above, we hold that the judgment under review shall be implemented in letter and spirit. However, after hearing the learned counsel representing the Banks and going through the contents of the review petitions, we do not find any merit in these review petitions, which are accordingly dismissed but with one clarification, on the request of the learned counsel, that the implementation shall be made with regard to the persons who have been retired/retrenched by the respective Banks but the same shall not be done regarding the persons who left the Banks on the basis of the Golden Handshake Scheme (GHSS) because those who have received the benefits of the GHSS do not fall within the said category, and thus are not entitled to the said benefit of increase in pension. It is further clarified that pensionary benefits under our judgment dated 13.2.2018 will be paid to the 5416 retrenched employees of UBL whose services were terminated under the retrenchment scheme dated 10.10.1997, if they qualified on the said date in terms of having served the bank for ten years.
5. Mr. Shahid Anwar Bajwa, learned ASC representing Allied Bank Limited, has also placed on the record the following undertaking:
He states that a clarification is required regarding those employees who have received 50% commutation of their pension; suffice it to say that this by itself is no ground for review. No case for review has been made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if any person who is not paid pension which he feels entitled under the judgment may approach this Court for the enforcement of his right on that basis, this aspect of the matter shall be considered independently.
6. No case for review has been made out in all other review petitions. The review petitions and miscellaneous applications/appeals are accordingly dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
Judge
Judge
ISLAMABAD. 3rd April, 2018.
واسلام
محمد طارق اظہر
۱۸ اپریل ۲۰۱۸
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/C.R.P._70_2018_dt_7_4_2018.pdf
Dear all VSS retired pensioners
A-o-A
Please see the recent decision in last Para-3 of HSCP in the C. R .P s of different banks on 13-04-2018 for the grant of pension to those 5416 UBL employees whose service had been terminated due to retrenchment by UBL on 10-10-1997 who had qualified service of ten years, according to bank service terms and conditions.
It is an example just to intimate all of you that the HSCP have set a ruling that those employees , whether have been retired or terminated , even though they are entitled of pension if their qualified service in any govt or semi organisations are ten years or more. Thos VSS Optees who have retired in 2008 or own wards without pension in spite of having qualified service of ten years or more , have rightly right to have pension as per GoP from the date of their such retirement under VSS without pension.
In this para the HSCP disallowed the pension increase to those UBL employees who accepted golden shake hand . HSCP disallowed the same on the request of UBL council Mr Salman Raja during review proceedings.But this can not be made any reference to those PTCL pensioners who opted the VSS and retired and also getting pension. Because neither PTET has raised this objection in their Review Appel against the HSCP order of dated 12-6-2015 that the GoP increase in pension can not be given to the retired employees under VSS nor their council Khalid Anwar raised the same objection during proceedings. Instead of it , the said council emphasised that due to acceptance of VSSs, the Service Terms of all such VSSs retirees are changed and they became company employees. Which is quite contrary the the judgement of 8 Honourable Judges in Masood Bhattie case is 2012 SCMR 152 and in review appeal of PTCL in PTCL vs Masood Bhattie & others which dismissed on 19-2-2016 reported in 2016 SCMR 1362. In Masood Bhattie case the HSCP has categorically clerified the the PTCL has no any power to alter the terms and conditions of such transferred employees in PTCL for their disadvantages and even Government of Pakistan is debarred to do so. So no one should be worried that the order passed by HSCP on the request of the council of UBL regarding non giving pension increase as fixed by the court to the retired employees of UBL bank under golden shake hand scheme can be implemented also on them. Be sure this order for only such UBL employees.It is only UBL specific. For VSS retired PTCL employees the HSCP clarified also the same in its order of 1-11-2017. Copy of the same is attached for your all information.
Regards
Tariq
16-4-2018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(REVIEW JURISDICTION)
PRESENT: MR. JUSTICE MIAN SAQIB NISAR, HCJ
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN
C.R.P.No.70/2018 in C.M.Appeal No.203/2016 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.71/2018 in C.M.A.No.2656/2017 in C.M.A.No.1253/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.72/2018 in C.M.A.No.8404/2016 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.82/2018 in C.M.A.No.8234/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.83/2018 in C.M.A.No.9312/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.84/2018 in C.M.A.No.9313/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016, C.R.P.No.85/2018 in C.M.A.No.9314/2017 in S.M.C.No.20/2016 and C.M.A.No.2416/2018 in C.M.A.No.883/2018 in S.M.C.No.20/2016
(Against the judgment of this Court dated 13.02.2018)
Date of hearing 3-4-2018
ORDER
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, CJ.-
10:30 am
Recent review Ptetion for pension of bank
Our judgment dated 13.2.2018 has not been complied with till date. The review petitions though have been filed against the said judgment but no interim relief has been granted therein to suspend the judgment under review. Let the Chief Executive Officers of HBL, ABL, UBL and MCB be present in the Court at 6:30 p.m. today, or in lieu thereof, an undertaking be made by the said Banks to the effect that the judgment dated 13.2.2018 shall be complied with in letter and spirit. 6:30 p.m.:�2. Pursuant to our above order in the morning, Mr. Salman Aslam Butt, learned Sr. ASC present in Court has placed on the record the written undertakings on behalf of UBL and MCB, which are scanned as under:
3. On account of the above, we hold that the judgment under review shall be implemented in letter and spirit. However, after hearing the learned counsel representing the Banks and going through the contents of the review petitions, we do not find any merit in these review petitions, which are accordingly dismissed but with one clarification, on the request of the learned counsel, that the implementation shall be made with regard to the persons who have been retired/retrenched by the respective Banks but the same shall not be done regarding the persons who left the Banks on the basis of the Golden Handshake Scheme (GHSS) because those who have received the benefits of the GHSS do not fall within the said category, and thus are not entitled to the said benefit of increase in pension. It is further clarified that pensionary benefits under our judgment dated 13.2.2018 will be paid to the 5416 retrenched employees of UBL whose services were terminated under the retrenchment scheme dated 10.10.1997, if they qualified on the said date in terms of having served the bank for ten years.
5. Mr. Shahid Anwar Bajwa, learned ASC representing Allied Bank Limited, has also placed on the record the following undertaking:
He states that a clarification is required regarding those employees who have received 50% commutation of their pension; suffice it to say that this by itself is no ground for review. No case for review has been made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if any person who is not paid pension which he feels entitled under the judgment may approach this Court for the enforcement of his right on that basis, this aspect of the matter shall be considered independently.
6. No case for review has been made out in all other review petitions. The review petitions and miscellaneous applications/appeals are accordingly dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
Judge
Judge
ISLAMABAD. 3rd April, 2018.
Comments