Article -263[Regarding collective representation]

 Article-263

نوٹ: کل میں نے اپنے آڑٹیکل 261 میں، پی ٹی ای ٹی اور پی ٹی سی ایل نے سپریم کوڑٹ کی طرف سے سپریم کوڑٹ کے 10 جولائی 2025 کے مطابق انکی Compliance Report  جو Defective تھی اسکے بارے میں ایک مضمون لکھا تھا کے یہ Compliance Report کیوں defective  ھے۔اب کچھ لوگ مجھ سے یہ سوال کررھے اس defective  Compliance Report پر سپریم کوڑٹ کیوں ایکشن نھیں لے رھی ھے۔ یاد رھے سپریم کوڑٹ کسی ایسے مسئلے پر کبھی خود ایکش نھیں لیتی جب تک کوئی انکے خلاف توھین عدالت کرے اور یہ بتائیے عدالت کو کیسے انھوں نے غلط بیانی کی اور کیوں عدالت توھین عدالت ھورھی ھے۔ یہ سوچ کر میری طرف آپ سب کی طرف سے یہ Collective Represetation  بھجی ھے جس میں انکو متنبہ کیا کے انکی بھیجی ھوئی تعمیلی رپورٹ defective ھے۔ اس پر سپریم کوڑٹ کے دئیے ھوئی احکامات کے تحت عمل کریں ورنہ ھم لوگ آپ کے خلاف توھین عدالت کا کیس دائئئر کریں گے۔

جسطرح میں نے یہ رپورٹ آپ میں سے ھر ایک چاھے وہ پنشر پٹیشنر ھو یا نا ھو اپنے اکیلے کی طرف سے یا اور ساتھیوں کو ملاکر اسی طرح کی رپورٹ بھیج سکتا ھے۔ میں چاھتا ھوں کے زیادہ سے زیادہ لوگ بھیجیں تاکے ان پر پریشر پڑھے۔

(طارق)

Date 21-4-2026

                                                       ______           

Collective Represetation

To

Executive Vice President (Legal Affairs)

Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL)

Headquarters, G-8/4

Islamabad

Subject:

Collective Representation Against Unlawful Cut-Off Formula, Selective Denial of Government Pension, and Prima Facie Wilful Non-Compliance of the Supreme Court Judgment dated 10-07-2025 in C.A. No. 1509/2021 & Connected Matters

Respectfully Submitted

This representation is submitted on behalf of the undersigned as well as all similarly placed PTCL pensioners / former T&T employees whose rights stand recognized by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan vide judgment dated 10-07-2025 in Civil Appeal No. 1509/2021 and connected matters.

At the outset, it is respectfully submitted that the present situation raises serious legal and constitutional concerns. PTCL/PTET have, in clear deviation from the binding judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court, adopted a self-created and artificial cut-off formula whereby only those employees are being treated as entitled to Government pension who:

 • were appointed in Grade-17,

 • through FPSC, and

 • before 01-01-1991.

All other similarly placed pensioners have been unlawfully excluded.

1. Background of Litigation

The Islamabad High Court, vide judgment dated 02-11-2021 (Double Bench), while deciding intra-court appeals arising from the Single Bench judgment dated March 2020, conclusively held that employees who:

 • fall within the definition of “Civil Servants” under Section 2(1)(b) of the Civil Servants Act, 1973;

 • were appointed in T&T prior to December 1991; and

 • retired upon normal superannuation without compensation

are entitled to Government-notified pension along with arrears.

The Single Bench had directed payment within two months, which was upheld.

2. Final Determination by the Supreme Court

PTCL/PTET challenged the above judgments through multiple CPLAs (2021). The Honourable Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 10-07-2025:

 • dismissed all such appeals;

 • restored and upheld the Islamabad High Court judgment; and

 • directed implementation in a transparent and equitable manner.

3. Unlawful Cut-Off Formula Adopted by PTCL/PTET

Despite the binding nature of the Supreme Court judgment, PTCL/PTET have unlawfully taken the position that only those employees appointed through FPSC in Grade-17 prior to 01-01-1991 qualify as civil servants and are entitled to Government pension.

This position is:

 • unsupported by the Supreme Court judgment;

 • unsupported by any statutory provision; and

 • directly contrary to the findings of the High Court.

4. Legal Defects in PTCL/PTET Position

(a) Absence of Legal Basis

No law, rule, or judicial pronouncement authorizes such restrictive classification.

(b) Violation of Equality

Similarly placed pensioners are being treated differently, in violation of the principle of equality before law.

(c) Misinterpretation of Judgment

The Supreme Court did not authorize PTCL/PTET to re-determine eligibility through internal administrative criteria.

(d) Ignoring Statutory Protection

Transferred employees retained their vested service and pension rights under statutory protection, which cannot be curtailed.

5. Irrational Consequences

If PTCL/PTET’s position is accepted:

 • similarly placed employees would lose all protected service rights;

 • no lawful alternative pension framework exists; and

 • statutory guarantees would become meaningless.

6. Misplaced Workman Argument

Any attempt to classify such employees as “workmen” is legally untenable because:

 • their service carried Government-linked pension protection;

 • they were governed by statutory service structures; and

 • the category of “workmen” does not carry such pension rights.

7. Burden on PTCL/PTET

PTCL/PTET are required to disclose:

 • legal basis of the cut-off date;

 • authority for limiting eligibility to FPSC Grade-17 officers;

 • reasons for exclusion of similarly placed pensioners;

 • committee proceedings and criteria adopted.

Failure to do so would confirm arbitrariness.

8. Prima Facie Wilful Non-Compliance

The present conduct amounts to:

 • selective compliance;

 • partial implementation;

 • misinterpretation of the Supreme Court judgment; and

 • denial of judicially recognized rights.

This constitutes prima facie wilful disobedience in substance, exposing responsible officials to contempt proceedings.

9. Collective Demand

PTCL/PTET are hereby called upon to:

 1. Withdraw the unlawful cut-off formula immediately;

 2. Extend benefits to all similarly placed pensioners;

 3. Ensure uniform and equitable implementation;

 4. Disclose full legal basis and record;

 5. Release pension and arrears accordingly.

10. Conclusion

The present position adopted by PTCL/PTET is:

 • legally indefensible;

 • discriminatory; and

 • contrary to the binding judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court.

Immediate rectification is required to ensure compliance in letter and spirit.

Important Note

 1. This representation is being made in a representative capacity for all similarly placed PTCL pensioners whose rights stand recognized by the Honourable Courts but remain unlawfully denied in implementation.”

 2. A copy of this representation is being preserved for appropriate legal proceedings, including contempt of court, in case of non-compliance.”

For Self and Other Similarly Placed 

PTCL Pensioners / Petitioners

Yours faithfully,

Muhammad Tariq Azhar

PTCL Pensioner

Retired General Manager (B-19), PTCL

Former T&T Employee 

CNIC: __________________

Employee #______________

Contact No:_____________

Address___________

Copy to:

 • Managing Director, PTET, Islamabad

 • General Manager, PTET, Islamabad