Article-177[Draft regarding Notice to Mazhar Hussain M D PTET for un lawful letters issued from GM PTET]

 Article -177

 Dated :24th June 2024

To,

Mr. Mazhar Hussain,

Managing Director, PTET,

Islamabad.

Subject: Formal Complaint Regarding Misrepresentation by Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa Resulting in Erroneous Judicial Outcome and Urgent  Request for Cancellation of Unlawful Letters and Implementation of High Court Decision ICT-82/2020 Dated 2nd November 2021 as in Para 19( i ).

Dear Sir

              I am compelled to address you concerning the current unsettling actions being carried out under the jurisdiction of General Manager PTET, Islamabad, which blatantly disregard the High Court's double bench decision dated November 2, 2021, under case number ICT-82/2020, specifically referring to paragraph number 19(iii). It has come to my attention that the department is distributing unlawful letters to almost all petitioners who have served in positions ranging from Grade 1 to 16 and have retired, inaccurately informing them that they fall under the 'workman' category, and consequently, do not qualify for the government-announced pension benefits. This action also unjustly affects those who, despite having served in positions from Grade 1 through 16, retired from a position classified under Grade 17 and above - positions they secured through respective promotions or by successfully passing the Federal  Public Service Examination.

Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa, in his capacity representing PTET/PTCL case, committed a grave disservice to justice and to the affected employees of T&T. By intentionally omitting critical facts and presenting false narratives, he misled the court, resulting in a decision that is fundamentally flawed and contrary to established legal norms.

During a hearing on June 9, 2021, when the court asked Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa, representing the appellants, why the matter of classifying employees from Grade 1 to 16 in T&T as workmen, and not as civil servants, wasn't addressed in the 2011 Supreme Court, Masood Bhatti case, Advocate Bajwa contended that since the appellants in Masood Bhatti's case were of higher grades and all are civil servants,  the issue of T&T's lower grade employees being workmen wasn’t raised. This statement was manifestly false as one of the appellants, Syed Muhammad Dilawaiz, was of a Grade 5 clerk. Importantly, the Supreme Court had previously declared all appellants, then T&T employees now working with PTCL, as civil servants, thus classifying all former T&T department employees as such. Consequently, the High Court’s decision on November 2, 2021, to classify lower grade T&T employees as workmen, leaned on the Supreme Court’s decision, which had only acknowledged higher grade T&T employees as civil servants. Should the court have been made aware that the Supreme Court’s decision on October 7, 2011, included appellants from both lower and upper grades of T&T employees as civil servants, it would have likely reconsidered the judgment that T&T employees, categorized under the Factory Act 1934 and Workmen Compensation Act 1923 as workmen, are not civil servants.

It is essential to highlight the deceptive representation by Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa, who falsely contended that former employees of T&T from grades 1 to 16 do not fall into the category of civil servants but are considered workmen. Consequently, they would not be entitled to the government’s pension but only to the pension approved by the company. This claim blatantly contradicts the facts established during a ruling by a two-member bench of the Supreme Court on February 15, 2018, in favor of 343 petitioners, many of whom were from grades 1-to-16, deciding they were entitled to the government-declared pension, not just the GoP pension increases and benefits distributed by the Trust accordingly to all concerned petitioners

The discrepancy in statements and the selective argumentation by Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa raises significant legal and ethical questions, highlighting potential misconduct and deception in legal proceedings. This behavior not only contradicts previous judicial findings but also undermines the trust and integrity crucial to the legal system.The implications of these actions are far-reaching, affecting not only the administration of justice but also the lives of countless former employees who may have been wrongfully denied their rightful entitlements based on inaccurate legal representations. It is imperative that this matter receives immediate and thorough investigation to correct any injustices that may have occurred. 

This misinformation significantly contributed to the detrimental ruling delivered by Justice Aamer Farooq, which would have been otherwise, had the truth been presented—that all employees, regardless of their grade and union affiliation, were indeed entitled to the mentioned benefits as per the supreme court rulings and the Civil Servants Act 1973. Mr. Bajwa's omission during the proceedings of the Masood Bhatti case in 2011 was a missed opportunity to clarify the entitlement of all grades to pension benefits, a crucial detail that would have spared the need for this correspondence.

Your distribution of these unlawful letters, presumably under misguided legal advice, undermines not only the integrity of the PTET but also violates the rights of its retired employees as per the Civil servant act and the Supreme Court's definitive rulings. This act of dissemination has sown confusion and distress amongst former employees rightfully entitled to their benefits, bringing to question the trust and reliability placed in the organization to uphold justice and fairness.

Therefore, I urge you to retract these illegal letters immediately and comply fully with the decision detailed in paragraph number 19(iii ) of the 2nd November 2021 ruling, guaranteeing all retired civil servants their rightful government-announced pension benefits. Failing which, the affected petitioners reserve the right to initiate contempt of court proceedings or file a case under CPC12(2) against PTET for its non-compliance and misleading information propagated by its appointed counsel, Advocate Shahid Anwar Bajwa, resulting in a controversial and flawed decision.

Thus, I urgently request your intervention to rectify the misrepresentations made and ensure compliance with all verdicts and legal statutes, ensuring fair treatment for all affected individuals.

Yours sincerely,

[Muhammad Tariq Azhar]

Retired General Manager (OPS)   PTCL

[Main respondent in ICA-98/2020]

Copy for information and necessary action to:-

 

1. Secretary (MoITT),  Ministry of Information Technology & Telecommunication 7th Floor, Kohsar Block, Pak Secretariat, 

        Islamabad.[  Ref : MoIT  File No 7-3/2011-Coord ]. 

2. The Registrar Islamabad High Court 

          Islamabad High Court Constitution Avenue , G-5 

           Islamabad.  [Ref :IHC decision in ICT-82/2020 Dated 2nd Nov2021]