Article -119 in English
Note :-Article -119 of dated 7th May 2020 in English with some minor modifications
Title: - The Board of Trustees of PTET has shown cruelty, malice and bigotry towards PTCL pensioners. The process of filing intra-court appeals by them against the decision of the Islamabad High Court on March 3, 2020 , in favour of PTCL Pensioners Petitioners , is a clear proof of their negative role and hostile attitude with PTCL Pensioners
Dear PTCL colleagues
اسلام و علیکم
It is a place of great sorrow and grief that the PTET's board of trustees have once again shown a hostile, bigoted attitude towards the PTCL pensioners, on their 35 petitions, in favor of the Islamabad High Court. They filled intra-court appeals on April 24, 2020 against the decision of the Single Bench of IHC of March 3, 2020 and seek an injunction. But thank God, the double bench of the apex court, headed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, Hon'ble Justice Athar Minallah, in spite of the repeated pleas of PTET lawyer Shahid Anwar Bajwa, He did not issue a restraining order and issued a notice on it and adjourned further proceedings till after Eid.
This act of trustees is tantamount to stabbing PTCL pensioners in the stomach once again. I am surprised that they also filed an intra-court appeal against the positive decision of the court on my petition No. 4588/2018. I filed this petition with 31 of my fellow petitioners on December 3, 2018 and only prayed for payment of pension increases as announced by the government periodically from July 1, 2010. What I did in my prayers , was that the petitioners of the case may also be granted the same declared pension increases by the government in the according to the verdicts Supreme Court in its decision of June 12, 2015 [reported in PTET vs Muhammad Arif 2015 SCMR 1472]. It should be paid in accordance with the law and principle laid down by HSCP in Hameed Akhtar Niazi ie Hameed Akhtar vs. Secretary Establishment reported in 1996 SCMR 1185 , in which Honourable Supreme Court ruled that any decision given by FST or Supreme Court , in favour of the government employee who litigates the case , the benefits of such favourable order , should also be extended to all such government employees whether they have litigated the case or not , Instead of they should be asked to approach the court in or legal forum. While the three-member bench of the Supreme Court reiterated the case of Anita Turab Ali case titled Syed Mehmood Akhtar Naqvi and others vs the Federation of Pakistan reported in PLD 2013 SC 195, reiterating the same Hameed Akhtar Niazi case is in 1996 SCMR 1185 . And the three member bench of It , headed by Ex Chief Justice Honourable Justice Jawwad S Khawja clarified the rule & law so framed that the benefit of the verdict in favor of any government employee who litigated the case , should also be extended to other such government employees as well, are binding upon to all institutions and Govt officers.Any of violation by them tantamount to be contempt of court , they will be charged under the Article 204(2)(a) of the Constitution .
There was no disputed matter in our petition # 4588/2018 which was required to be discussed /argued in the court. We had asked only for the same, ie only Government Pension Increases, which the trust had already granted to 343 petitioners, following the order of the Supreme Court dated February 15, 2018. Hon'ble Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb has decided on our petition keeping in view the said orders of the Supreme Court for those all the petitioners only ,who were departmental employees and after their transfer to the corporation and the company , they were retired and ordered to grant govt pension increase as announced by the government , after calculating the arrears of the same within sixty days from the date of receipt .
I had filed this petition ie 4588/2018 in the court of Justice Amir Farooq, Hon'ble Judge, Islamabad, on December 3, 2018, who issued notice to file a reply within fifteen days. But PTET did not submit for a year. On December 5, 2019, this writ petition was marked to Hon'ble Justice Gul Hassan Aurangzeb, who was already hearing many such new and old writ petitions . He clubbed it with Rasool Khan’s writ petition # 523/2012 , filed in year 2012 and with and with such petitions .On 13th January 2020, during the hearing of these petitions, when this petition was presented before him, he reserved it for decision without any arguments, saying that it is a case of “implementing if the court's order”. Now, it is beyond comprehension for the PTET to file an intra-court appeal against this decision, to find fault with the referred orders of the Supreme Court in favor of PTCL pensioners petitioners . The decision of the Hon'ble Judge is based on said referred cases of HSCP. So what could be wrong with his decision? , that PTET had to file this intra court appeal. On the receipt of court notice to us , I would definitely request to court to dismiss their intra court appeal as it is based on their malicious character and malfafied intention .They have tried to find fault in the decisions of the Supreme Court which they had already complied with and almost 343 such petitioners , who had been paid such govt pension increases,as per the HSCP order dated June 12, 2015. At the same time, the apex court will be asked not only to dismiss his intra-court appeal with a fine but also to initiate contempt proceedings against them
It is a pity that the this trust PTET , set up by the government of Pakistan only to disburse the pension as fixed by government to departmental employees who had been retired their being transferred to the corporation & company, but Trust has totally failed to fulfil its obligations, according Functions and Power given as per Clause 46 of P T ( Re-Organisation) Act 1996. The Trust was responsible to pay Govt pensions to all such retired departmental employees from pension fund created by the government under Clause 44 o P T ( Re-Organisation) Act 1996 , in accordance with the government's pension rules . The Board of Trustees are no longer longer working in the interest of such PTCL pensioners . Now They are working for the interest Company only to give them maximum benefits as much as possible .The Senate Standing Committee on Information and Technology and Telecommunications has clearly stated in its special report that the Trust is operating under pressure from PTCL and that the Trust’s actions will benefit the Company at the expense of the government of Pakistan. Benefiting from the trust's assets for the benefit of thousands of pensioners. The Trust had been functioning properly since its inception on January 1, 1996 and has been paying all these PTCL pensioners on a regular basis every month as prescribed by the Government. The Board of Trustees of the Trust used to increase the pensions announced by the government every year since from its creation wef 1st January 1996, all of a sudden, wef July 1, 2010, they left the government interest and started working in the interest of PTCL, so At the behest of the company, they decided to increase their approved pension to 8% instead of the 15% increase announced by the government in 2011-2010, and has continued to do so every year since then. For not paying the pension increase yearly as per govt , is only their motive that the Company has to pay a small amount of its annual contribution to the pension fund as much as possible .From the very beginning, started litigations against the decision of the Islamabad High Court in favor of PTCL pensioners on December 21, 2011 which is still going on. And to defend his wrongdoing, they recklessly used the pension fund, which they had no any legal authority to do. The Senate Standing Committee on Information and Technology and Telecommunications , in its special report has also raised serious objections to the payment from the pension fund to other works in this manner.
"Beneficiaries (the pensioners) are praying to justice system for restoring their legal rights as per Act. The trust is defending its wrong doings by the beneficiaries moneys and too in the name of Federal Government."
Honourable Judje Justice Gul Aurang Sahib, while giving a detailed judgment on the old petition of Rasool Khan & etc ie WP -523/2012 on 28 pages , disposed off all attached /clubbed writ petitions, by ordering them to give their requested government reliefs to whom , who were recruited before the enactment of PTC Act 1991 ie those who were called departmental employees ie employees of T&T Government of Pakistan. The government reliefs , which Honarable Judge ordered for pay within sixty days , according tho their respective prayers , includes calculated arrears of the pension increases announced by the government wef July 1, 2010 , its announced 5% medical allowance along with pension wef July 1, 2010 , 75% of pension increase of widows pension with that of their late husband's pension from July 1, 2010 , order of restoring commuted pension , not being restored by the Trust since from long and required to be restored and pay on the date of reaching their litigimate age for such restoration , and granting increased ordly allowance to the retired PTCL officers of B-20 and above etc
I have read this detailed judgment very carefully and it has become clear that the Honorable Judge issued the above orders in favor of PTCL Pensioners Petitioners , has focused on the following Supreme Court cases and concluded the decisions on the basis of it.
1. PTCL vs Masood Bhattie (2016SCMR1362),
2.PTET vs Muhammad Arif (2015SCMR1472),
3. Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783)
The Honourable Judge clarified at the outset of his judgment that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had clarified the rules for the petitioners in the above cases, and to implement on it , is not only the responsibility of this court under Article 189 but also of PTET and PTCL under Article 190 of constitution.They are obliged to give the same benefits to all such departmental employees as they have given to departmental employees like them in PTET vs Muhammad Arif (supra) & Muhammad Riaz vs Federation(supra) , who were party in these cases .He further contended that these petitioners are the same and their reasons are the same as those of the departmental employees who were granted government relief by the court on their petitions. Therefore, PTET and PTCL should also give the same reliefs to them and should not be litigated with them. The Honorable Judge gave references to the following Supreme Court judgments , in which the court had also ordered to provide the same benefits to the civil servants who did not litigate the case as to the civil servants or employees who who litigated the same
1. Hameed Akhtar Niazi versus The Secretary Establishment Division (1996 SCMR 1185)
2. Wapda Vs Abdul Ghaffar
[2018 SCMR 380]
3. Federation of Pakistan Vs Ghulam Mustafa [2013 SCMR 1914]
4. Tara Chand Vs Karachi Water Sewerage Board [2005 SCMR 499]
5. Abdul Hameed Nasir Vs National Bank of Pakistan [2003 SCMR 1030]
6. Government of Punjab Vs Samina Perveen [2009 SCMR 1]
The purpose of my writing the above references of the Supreme Court given by the Honorable Judge , as lawyer of PTET, has taken this big stand of Raja Raja Riaz case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783), that the HJ ordered gave the same relief to the petitioners as given by Supreme Court to Raja Riaz on the condition that it would not be made precedence in other cases. This means he objected that how Honourable Judge had benefited the petitioners by giving an example of Raja Riaz said case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783). The apprehension of the council of PTET is totally wrong, as the stipulation is not written anywhere that for not setting precedence for other cases Raja Riaz case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783), his decision is in any other case. So how does the esteemed judge could know that it was forbidden to give such reference .The Honorable Judge has included this case along with other such cases (as mentioned above) and written that only “that the responsibility to implement the decisions given in them is not only the responsibility of the court under Article -189 but of also of PTET and PTCL under Article -190 .” The the said remarks for not making precedence in other cases , were given by HSCP in decision CoC case # Crl. org 63/2015 of dated 27th October 2017 filed by Raja Riaz and this decision was not the decision of the Court it self, other wise the court had to explain that why it was not necessary to quote such in other cases .Actually when their council learned Shahid Anwar Bajwa requested the court that PTET and PTCL agreed to pay the government salary and pension to Raja Riaz but it should be not make any precedence in other cases .Then the court , on this request of their council , disposed off the CoC appeal with out any ordering further on it .Their Council concerned had to give such a reference of CoC case of Raja Riaz ie # Crl. org 63/2015 of dated 27th October 2017 in reply original petitions .But neither he mentioned it in his reply nor made any arguments during the proceeding of the said PTCL Pensioners Petitioner cases. If he had done so, surely the esteemed judge would have mentioned the same in his judgment with proper answer .Now all this in intra court appeals ,what is the point of writing this now ???
Giving such precedence of the said Raja Riaz case i.e. Muhammad Riaz v. Federation of Pakistan (2015 SC 1783),Hon'ble Justice Shaukat Siddiqui, Former Judge of Islam High Court had on January 18, 2017 ruled in favor of Writ Petition No. 1875/2016 of Nooruli and others and directed PTCL to pay such payments as per the government scales with in fifteen days. Those four petioners were belonged to KPK PTCL and had prayed for payment salaries as per govt scales government as per the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court. PTCL had also filed an Intra Court Appeal ICA 34/2017 against it which was also dismissed on December 17, 2018. Now PTCL has also filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against ,which is pending there.
It should be remembered that the decision , in favor of Raja Riaz was given by the esteemed judges of the two-member bench of the Supreme Court on July 6, 2015 ,was based on the decision of esteemed Judges of three- member bench of HSCP in favour PTCL pensioners petitioners of dated 12th June (2015 2015 SCMR 1472 ) and this decision was based on the decision of esteemed Judges of three- member bench of HSCP in favour PTCL transferred employees in PTCL , on the 1st January 1996 , from PTC .This said judgement which reported in 2012 SCMR 152 ,was the explanations of the relevant provisions of in PTC Act 1991 & P T Act 1996 , which also uphold by a the five-member Honorable Judges bench on February 19, 2016 , while dismissing their review petition ie of PTCL. It is reported in 2016 SCMR 1362
Presently the said intra-court appeals have been filed against the decision of IHC of dated 3rd March 2020 , in favor of the petitioners of almost 35 petitions , they are being chased away with the same stick. PTET will not get anything from it, just their lawyer Shahid Anwar Bajwa gets a lot and will charge fees of million rupees . Which will be paid from the "Pension Fund" of PTCL Pensioners by PTET .The payments from pension fund money for other purpose is prohibited as it is illegal .Trust used this pension fund money to defend their wrongdoings. They have spent crores of rupees but to date they have not succeeded in any case. Their lawyers have been chanting for years that the verdicts in the Masood Bhatti case are wrong. And they are trying their best to somehow get this order from the court that the government employees, who were transferred to the company , have now became employees of the Company and only the rules of Master and Servant of the Company would apply to them. But it can not be happened again, no matter how hard they try. The decision of the three-member bench of the Supreme Court on October 7, 2011 has been finalized in favor of the transferred government employees when their review petition was dismissed by the five-member bench of the Supreme Court on February 19 , 2016 One thing the Supreme Court had clarified in the said decision of dated 19th February 2016 , that the employees of T&T and the Corporation working in the Company would not be Civil Servants but they would be referred to in section 3 to section 22 of the Civil Servants Act 1973 Service Terms and Conditions, and in case of violation by PTCL, such employees would have the right to approach the High Courts in accordance with Article 199 of the Constitution. While quoting this judgement of the five-member bench of PTCL vs Masood Bhattie (2016SCMR1362) of dated 19 February 2016 , by honourable Judge ,on the repeatedly insistence of the council of PTET for the application of Master and Servants on such transferred employees in the Company , has clarified that such petitioners were no more civil servants but they had right to have the all such benefits given by the government to its civil servants.
PTET did not find any bar on their present intra-court appeals which they desperately wanted because it was their chance to get the bet somehow taken and then the decision should be delayed by various tricks . This is their procedure, first file appeals, then do not follow the order of the court with super bets and then put so many obstacles in the court proceedings on these appeals and somehow delay the decision. The first decision given by the Islamabad High Court on December 21, 2011 in favor of Muhammad Arif and others on their writ petition WP-148/2011 .But the court's decision was followed by eight years of delaying tactics in March 2018, on the order of the Supreme Court dated February 18, 2018, and it implemented partially. But inshallah we will not allow this to happen now. If they do not make the payments as per the court order within the stipulated time, then contempt of court cases will be filed against them immediately and every effort will be made to ensure that all PTCL pensioners get their due rights Just pray to Allah.
Thanks
Regards
(Muhammad Tariq Azhar)
Rawalpindi
Monday , 11th May 2020
Title: - The Board of Trustees of PTET has shown cruelty, malice and bigotry towards PTCL pensioners. The process of filing intra-court appeals by them against the decision of the Islamabad High Court on March 3, 2020 , in favour of PTCL Pensioners Petitioners , is a clear proof of their negative role and hostile attitude with PTCL Pensioners
Dear PTCL colleagues
اسلام و علیکم
It is a place of great sorrow and grief that the PTET's board of trustees have once again shown a hostile, bigoted attitude towards the PTCL pensioners, on their 35 petitions, in favor of the Islamabad High Court. They filled intra-court appeals on April 24, 2020 against the decision of the Single Bench of IHC of March 3, 2020 and seek an injunction. But thank God, the double bench of the apex court, headed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, Hon'ble Justice Athar Minallah, in spite of the repeated pleas of PTET lawyer Shahid Anwar Bajwa, He did not issue a restraining order and issued a notice on it and adjourned further proceedings till after Eid.
This act of trustees is tantamount to stabbing PTCL pensioners in the stomach once again. I am surprised that they also filed an intra-court appeal against the positive decision of the court on my petition No. 4588/2018. I filed this petition with 31 of my fellow petitioners on December 3, 2018 and only prayed for payment of pension increases as announced by the government periodically from July 1, 2010. What I did in my prayers , was that the petitioners of the case may also be granted the same declared pension increases by the government in the according to the verdicts Supreme Court in its decision of June 12, 2015 [reported in PTET vs Muhammad Arif 2015 SCMR 1472]. It should be paid in accordance with the law and principle laid down by HSCP in Hameed Akhtar Niazi ie Hameed Akhtar vs. Secretary Establishment reported in 1996 SCMR 1185 , in which Honourable Supreme Court ruled that any decision given by FST or Supreme Court , in favour of the government employee who litigates the case , the benefits of such favourable order , should also be extended to all such government employees whether they have litigated the case or not , Instead of they should be asked to approach the court in or legal forum. While the three-member bench of the Supreme Court reiterated the case of Anita Turab Ali case titled Syed Mehmood Akhtar Naqvi and others vs the Federation of Pakistan reported in PLD 2013 SC 195, reiterating the same Hameed Akhtar Niazi case is in 1996 SCMR 1185 . And the three member bench of It , headed by Ex Chief Justice Honourable Justice Jawwad S Khawja clarified the rule & law so framed that the benefit of the verdict in favor of any government employee who litigated the case , should also be extended to other such government employees as well, are binding upon to all institutions and Govt officers.Any of violation by them tantamount to be contempt of court , they will be charged under the Article 204(2)(a) of the Constitution .
There was no disputed matter in our petition # 4588/2018 which was required to be discussed /argued in the court. We had asked only for the same, ie only Government Pension Increases, which the trust had already granted to 343 petitioners, following the order of the Supreme Court dated February 15, 2018. Hon'ble Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb has decided on our petition keeping in view the said orders of the Supreme Court for those all the petitioners only ,who were departmental employees and after their transfer to the corporation and the company , they were retired and ordered to grant govt pension increase as announced by the government , after calculating the arrears of the same within sixty days from the date of receipt .
I had filed this petition ie 4588/2018 in the court of Justice Amir Farooq, Hon'ble Judge, Islamabad, on December 3, 2018, who issued notice to file a reply within fifteen days. But PTET did not submit for a year. On December 5, 2019, this writ petition was marked to Hon'ble Justice Gul Hassan Aurangzeb, who was already hearing many such new and old writ petitions . He clubbed it with Rasool Khan’s writ petition # 523/2012 , filed in year 2012 and with and with such petitions .On 13th January 2020, during the hearing of these petitions, when this petition was presented before him, he reserved it for decision without any arguments, saying that it is a case of “implementing if the court's order”. Now, it is beyond comprehension for the PTET to file an intra-court appeal against this decision, to find fault with the referred orders of the Supreme Court in favor of PTCL pensioners petitioners . The decision of the Hon'ble Judge is based on said referred cases of HSCP. So what could be wrong with his decision? , that PTET had to file this intra court appeal. On the receipt of court notice to us , I would definitely request to court to dismiss their intra court appeal as it is based on their malicious character and malfafied intention .They have tried to find fault in the decisions of the Supreme Court which they had already complied with and almost 343 such petitioners , who had been paid such govt pension increases,as per the HSCP order dated June 12, 2015. At the same time, the apex court will be asked not only to dismiss his intra-court appeal with a fine but also to initiate contempt proceedings against them
It is a pity that the this trust PTET , set up by the government of Pakistan only to disburse the pension as fixed by government to departmental employees who had been retired their being transferred to the corporation & company, but Trust has totally failed to fulfil its obligations, according Functions and Power given as per Clause 46 of P T ( Re-Organisation) Act 1996. The Trust was responsible to pay Govt pensions to all such retired departmental employees from pension fund created by the government under Clause 44 o P T ( Re-Organisation) Act 1996 , in accordance with the government's pension rules . The Board of Trustees are no longer longer working in the interest of such PTCL pensioners . Now They are working for the interest Company only to give them maximum benefits as much as possible .The Senate Standing Committee on Information and Technology and Telecommunications has clearly stated in its special report that the Trust is operating under pressure from PTCL and that the Trust’s actions will benefit the Company at the expense of the government of Pakistan. Benefiting from the trust's assets for the benefit of thousands of pensioners. The Trust had been functioning properly since its inception on January 1, 1996 and has been paying all these PTCL pensioners on a regular basis every month as prescribed by the Government. The Board of Trustees of the Trust used to increase the pensions announced by the government every year since from its creation wef 1st January 1996, all of a sudden, wef July 1, 2010, they left the government interest and started working in the interest of PTCL, so At the behest of the company, they decided to increase their approved pension to 8% instead of the 15% increase announced by the government in 2011-2010, and has continued to do so every year since then. For not paying the pension increase yearly as per govt , is only their motive that the Company has to pay a small amount of its annual contribution to the pension fund as much as possible .From the very beginning, started litigations against the decision of the Islamabad High Court in favor of PTCL pensioners on December 21, 2011 which is still going on. And to defend his wrongdoing, they recklessly used the pension fund, which they had no any legal authority to do. The Senate Standing Committee on Information and Technology and Telecommunications , in its special report has also raised serious objections to the payment from the pension fund to other works in this manner.
"Beneficiaries (the pensioners) are praying to justice system for restoring their legal rights as per Act. The trust is defending its wrong doings by the beneficiaries moneys and too in the name of Federal Government."
Honourable Judje Justice Gul Aurang Sahib, while giving a detailed judgment on the old petition of Rasool Khan & etc ie WP -523/2012 on 28 pages , disposed off all attached /clubbed writ petitions, by ordering them to give their requested government reliefs to whom , who were recruited before the enactment of PTC Act 1991 ie those who were called departmental employees ie employees of T&T Government of Pakistan. The government reliefs , which Honarable Judge ordered for pay within sixty days , according tho their respective prayers , includes calculated arrears of the pension increases announced by the government wef July 1, 2010 , its announced 5% medical allowance along with pension wef July 1, 2010 , 75% of pension increase of widows pension with that of their late husband's pension from July 1, 2010 , order of restoring commuted pension , not being restored by the Trust since from long and required to be restored and pay on the date of reaching their litigimate age for such restoration , and granting increased ordly allowance to the retired PTCL officers of B-20 and above etc
I have read this detailed judgment very carefully and it has become clear that the Honorable Judge issued the above orders in favor of PTCL Pensioners Petitioners , has focused on the following Supreme Court cases and concluded the decisions on the basis of it.
1. PTCL vs Masood Bhattie (2016SCMR1362),
2.PTET vs Muhammad Arif (2015SCMR1472),
3. Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783)
The Honourable Judge clarified at the outset of his judgment that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had clarified the rules for the petitioners in the above cases, and to implement on it , is not only the responsibility of this court under Article 189 but also of PTET and PTCL under Article 190 of constitution.They are obliged to give the same benefits to all such departmental employees as they have given to departmental employees like them in PTET vs Muhammad Arif (supra) & Muhammad Riaz vs Federation(supra) , who were party in these cases .He further contended that these petitioners are the same and their reasons are the same as those of the departmental employees who were granted government relief by the court on their petitions. Therefore, PTET and PTCL should also give the same reliefs to them and should not be litigated with them. The Honorable Judge gave references to the following Supreme Court judgments , in which the court had also ordered to provide the same benefits to the civil servants who did not litigate the case as to the civil servants or employees who who litigated the same
1. Hameed Akhtar Niazi versus The Secretary Establishment Division (1996 SCMR 1185)
2. Wapda Vs Abdul Ghaffar
[2018 SCMR 380]
3. Federation of Pakistan Vs Ghulam Mustafa [2013 SCMR 1914]
4. Tara Chand Vs Karachi Water Sewerage Board [2005 SCMR 499]
5. Abdul Hameed Nasir Vs National Bank of Pakistan [2003 SCMR 1030]
6. Government of Punjab Vs Samina Perveen [2009 SCMR 1]
The purpose of my writing the above references of the Supreme Court given by the Honorable Judge , as lawyer of PTET, has taken this big stand of Raja Raja Riaz case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783), that the HJ ordered gave the same relief to the petitioners as given by Supreme Court to Raja Riaz on the condition that it would not be made precedence in other cases. This means he objected that how Honourable Judge had benefited the petitioners by giving an example of Raja Riaz said case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783). The apprehension of the council of PTET is totally wrong, as the stipulation is not written anywhere that for not setting precedence for other cases Raja Riaz case ie Muhammad Riaz vs Federation of Pakistan (2015SC1783), his decision is in any other case. So how does the esteemed judge could know that it was forbidden to give such reference .The Honorable Judge has included this case along with other such cases (as mentioned above) and written that only “that the responsibility to implement the decisions given in them is not only the responsibility of the court under Article -189 but of also of PTET and PTCL under Article -190 .” The the said remarks for not making precedence in other cases , were given by HSCP in decision CoC case # Crl. org 63/2015 of dated 27th October 2017 filed by Raja Riaz and this decision was not the decision of the Court it self, other wise the court had to explain that why it was not necessary to quote such in other cases .Actually when their council learned Shahid Anwar Bajwa requested the court that PTET and PTCL agreed to pay the government salary and pension to Raja Riaz but it should be not make any precedence in other cases .Then the court , on this request of their council , disposed off the CoC appeal with out any ordering further on it .Their Council concerned had to give such a reference of CoC case of Raja Riaz ie # Crl. org 63/2015 of dated 27th October 2017 in reply original petitions .But neither he mentioned it in his reply nor made any arguments during the proceeding of the said PTCL Pensioners Petitioner cases. If he had done so, surely the esteemed judge would have mentioned the same in his judgment with proper answer .Now all this in intra court appeals ,what is the point of writing this now ???
Giving such precedence of the said Raja Riaz case i.e. Muhammad Riaz v. Federation of Pakistan (2015 SC 1783),Hon'ble Justice Shaukat Siddiqui, Former Judge of Islam High Court had on January 18, 2017 ruled in favor of Writ Petition No. 1875/2016 of Nooruli and others and directed PTCL to pay such payments as per the government scales with in fifteen days. Those four petioners were belonged to KPK PTCL and had prayed for payment salaries as per govt scales government as per the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court. PTCL had also filed an Intra Court Appeal ICA 34/2017 against it which was also dismissed on December 17, 2018. Now PTCL has also filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against ,which is pending there.
It should be remembered that the decision , in favor of Raja Riaz was given by the esteemed judges of the two-member bench of the Supreme Court on July 6, 2015 ,was based on the decision of esteemed Judges of three- member bench of HSCP in favour PTCL pensioners petitioners of dated 12th June (2015 2015 SCMR 1472 ) and this decision was based on the decision of esteemed Judges of three- member bench of HSCP in favour PTCL transferred employees in PTCL , on the 1st January 1996 , from PTC .This said judgement which reported in 2012 SCMR 152 ,was the explanations of the relevant provisions of in PTC Act 1991 & P T Act 1996 , which also uphold by a the five-member Honorable Judges bench on February 19, 2016 , while dismissing their review petition ie of PTCL. It is reported in 2016 SCMR 1362
Presently the said intra-court appeals have been filed against the decision of IHC of dated 3rd March 2020 , in favor of the petitioners of almost 35 petitions , they are being chased away with the same stick. PTET will not get anything from it, just their lawyer Shahid Anwar Bajwa gets a lot and will charge fees of million rupees . Which will be paid from the "Pension Fund" of PTCL Pensioners by PTET .The payments from pension fund money for other purpose is prohibited as it is illegal .Trust used this pension fund money to defend their wrongdoings. They have spent crores of rupees but to date they have not succeeded in any case. Their lawyers have been chanting for years that the verdicts in the Masood Bhatti case are wrong. And they are trying their best to somehow get this order from the court that the government employees, who were transferred to the company , have now became employees of the Company and only the rules of Master and Servant of the Company would apply to them. But it can not be happened again, no matter how hard they try. The decision of the three-member bench of the Supreme Court on October 7, 2011 has been finalized in favor of the transferred government employees when their review petition was dismissed by the five-member bench of the Supreme Court on February 19 , 2016 One thing the Supreme Court had clarified in the said decision of dated 19th February 2016 , that the employees of T&T and the Corporation working in the Company would not be Civil Servants but they would be referred to in section 3 to section 22 of the Civil Servants Act 1973 Service Terms and Conditions, and in case of violation by PTCL, such employees would have the right to approach the High Courts in accordance with Article 199 of the Constitution. While quoting this judgement of the five-member bench of PTCL vs Masood Bhattie (2016SCMR1362) of dated 19 February 2016 , by honourable Judge ,on the repeatedly insistence of the council of PTET for the application of Master and Servants on such transferred employees in the Company , has clarified that such petitioners were no more civil servants but they had right to have the all such benefits given by the government to its civil servants.
PTET did not find any bar on their present intra-court appeals which they desperately wanted because it was their chance to get the bet somehow taken and then the decision should be delayed by various tricks . This is their procedure, first file appeals, then do not follow the order of the court with super bets and then put so many obstacles in the court proceedings on these appeals and somehow delay the decision. The first decision given by the Islamabad High Court on December 21, 2011 in favor of Muhammad Arif and others on their writ petition WP-148/2011 .But the court's decision was followed by eight years of delaying tactics in March 2018, on the order of the Supreme Court dated February 18, 2018, and it implemented partially. But inshallah we will not allow this to happen now. If they do not make the payments as per the court order within the stipulated time, then contempt of court cases will be filed against them immediately and every effort will be made to ensure that all PTCL pensioners get their due rights Just pray to Allah.
Thanks
Regards
(Muhammad Tariq Azhar)
Rawalpindi
Monday , 11th May 2020
Comments