Article-285 [Regarding Inconsistent and Legally Defective Position of PTET Regarding Grant of GoP Pension

Article-285 [Regarding Inconsistent and Legally Defective Position of PTET Regarding Grant of GoP Pension Subject: Inconsistent and Legally Defective Position of PTET Regarding Grant of GoP Pension The factual and legal position emerging from your narration clearly establishes a serious inconsistency, contradiction, and prima facie non-compliance on the part of PTET, particularly in light of binding judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan. 1. Established Conduct of PTET in 2018 (Admission by Conduct) Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s order dated 15-02-2018, PTET, through its then General Manager (Mr. Farooq), implemented Government of Pakistan (GoP) pension in favour of 342 PTCL pensioners who had retired normally at the age of 60. • These pensioners belonged to all grades (BPS-1 to BPS-22) • Their modes of appointment were diverse, including: • FPSC-qualified civil servants • Departmentally recruited employees • No distinction whatsoever was drawn between: • “Civil servants” and “workmen” • FPSC and non-FPSC appointees • Lower and higher grades More importantly: PTET, through its counsel, Mr. Shahid Anwar Bajwa, expressly represented before the Court that GoP pension would be extended to all such petitioners except VSS retirees. On this basis, PTET: • Issued individual letters to each pensioner • Calculated and communicated: • GoP pension entitlement • arrears payable This constitutes a clear admission on facts and law, and creates a binding precedent under the doctrine of past and consistent practice. 2. No “Workman Objection” Raised in 2018 At that time, PTET: • Never raised the plea that BPS-1 to BPS-16 employees were “workmen” • Never denied their entitlement to GoP pension on this ground • Never restricted entitlement to FPSC recruits or BPS-17 officers This is legally significant because: A position consciously not taken earlier, and contrary to implemented policy, cannot later be introduced to defeat vested rights. 3. Supreme Court Judgment dated 10-07-2025 – Binding Clarification The Honourable Supreme Court, in its judgment dated 10 July 2025, conclusively settled the issue by holding that: • Employees of T&T who were transferred to the Corporation/Company • And who were civil servants at the time of transfer are entitled to: Government of Pakistan pension and all corresponding increases The judgment did not introduce any classification based on: • FPSC vs non-FPSC • BPS-17 vs BPS-1 to 16 • “Workman” vs “non-workman” ⸻ 4. PTET’s Present موقف – Arbitrary and Legally Unsustainable Despite the above: PTET has now taken a completely contradictory and restrictive position, namely: • Limiting GoP pension only to: • Those appointed through FPSC • In BPS-17 • Before January 1991 • Denying the same to: • All other similarly placed pensioners • On the ground that they are “workmen” This position is legally flawed for the following reasons: (a) Contrary to Supreme Court Judgment (10-07-2025) The judgment contains no such restriction. (b) Contrary to PTET’s Own Past Conduct (2018) PTET had already: • Accepted broader entitlement • Implemented GoP pension across all grades (c) Violation of Equality Principle Similarly placed pensioners cannot be discriminated on artificial classifications. (d) No Legal Basis for “Workman” Argument • No statutory provision supports this distinction in pension matters • No judicial precedent authorizes denial of GoP pension on this ground 5. Filing of Civil Review Petitions – No Automatic Suspension PTET’s filing of Civil Review Petitions (CRPs): • Does not suspend the operation of the judgment dated 10-07-2025 • Unless a specific stay order is granted by the Supreme Court Therefore: Continued non-compliance amounts to wilful disobedience of a binding judgment 6. Legal Conclusion (To the Point) The present stance of PTET is: • Self-contradictory (against its own 2018 implementation) • Legally untenable (unsupported by law or judgment) • Discriminatory (violating equal treatment) • In defiance of Supreme Court directions (10-07-2025) ⸻ 7. Strong Legal Position Available to Pensioners On these grounds, affected pensioners have a solid and enforceable case for: • Full implementation of GoP pension • Withdrawal of arbitrary classifications • Payment of arrears from the due date • Initiation of: • Contempt of Court proceedings, if non-compliance continues Final Observational Line (For Legal Use) “PTET, having once implemented GoP pension across all grades without distinction, is estopped from introducing artificial classifications post facto to defeat vested and judicially recognized rights of similarly placed pensioners.” Regards [Tariq] Date.1-5-2026