Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASLAM VS Respondent: MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE
1998 P L C (C
1998 P L C (C.S.) 93
[Lahore High Court]
Before Sharif Hussain Bokhari, J
MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others
versus
MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE and others
Writ Petition No. 6176 of 1995, decided on 25th October, 1995.
Punjab Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979)---
----S. 166---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 199---Constitutional petition---Competency---Civil service---Overtime---Alternate remedy ---Non -availing of when justified---Petitioners in their Constitutional petition had claimed that they were entitled to payment of overtime allowance according to Memorandum issued by Government dated 7-8-1994 which had been denied to them---Constitutional petition filed by petitioners was resisted on ground that appeal was competent in accordance with S. 166 of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979, thus, Constitutional petition was incompetent---Petitioners had already made application/representation to Appellate Authority, but same was pending and no action had been taken on that application ---Pendency of representation before Appellate Authority without any relief to petitioners, would make alternate remedy illusory and inadequate---Petitioners, in circumstances, would be entitled to invoke Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court despite pendency of their representation before Appellate Authority---High Court accepting Constitutional petition directed Authority concerned to pay overtime allowances to petitioners in accordance with direction of Government.
Sardar Muhammad Aslam Sukhaira for Petitioners.
Ch. Sibghatullah for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 25th October, 1995.
JUDGMENT .
This writ petition was admitted to regular hearing vide order dated 11-6-1995 and it was ordered that the case be fixed for hearing before summer vacation as very short point in the matter was involved. The case has come up for hearing today. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed report and parawise comments which are treated as written statement on the request of the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are employees of Municipal Committee, Pattoki and are working as octroi staff in the Municipal Committee.
3. The grievance made by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the Government of Punjab issued Memorandum dated 7-8-1994, addressed to the Administrators of Corporations and Municipal Committees etc. in the Province of Punjab. This Memorandum is as follows:
"Octroi staff including goods exit staff, water supply etc were enjoying one day pay on account of working on closed/gazetted holidays in lieu of rest.
Now they are observing two holidays in a week as per letter of even number dated 14-6-1994. Thus, they became entitled for payment of double day overtime allowance.
You are, therefore, requested to take further action accordingly."
4. The learned counsel has also referred to an earlier circular letter of Government of Punjab dated 2-6-1994 which is placed on record by the learned counsel for the respondents along-with the reply. According to this letter, office hours for the employees under the administrative control of Government of Punjab were increased as under:
Sunday to Thursday 8-00 a.m. to 4-00 p.m. with 30 minutes break from 1-00 p.m. to 1-3.0 p.m. for lunch and prayer.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are obliged to work 8 hours a day and five days in a week and Friday and Saturday are closed days and accordingly they are entitled to the grant of double day over time allowance in accordance with the aforementioned Memorandum dated 7-8-1994 (Annexure ' A'). He further contends that Municipal Committee, Phoolnagar is under the administrative control of respondent No. 1 and its employees are also paid overtime allowance according to circular letter dated 7-8-1994 but the petitioners are being discriminated.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection that the appeal is competent before the Deputy Commissioner, Kasur in accordance with section 166 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979. Learned counsel for the petitioners has replied that since this is a question of fundamental rights and also because the petitioners are entitled to grant of
allowance as they are being discriminated, therefore, this petition cannot be dismissed at this stage on this ground that an alternate remedy was available to them. The learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that the petitioners have made an application to the Additional Director, Local Government, Kasur for redressal of their grievance. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, states that this was an application made to the Assistant Director in the month of February, 1995 and no action has been taken on this application.
7. Be that as it may, the directions of the Provincial Government as contained in the aforesaid letter dated 7-8-1994 are very clear, according to which the petitioners are entitled to payment of double day overtime allowance for Saturdays and Fridays. These directions are very clear and are equally applicable to the petitioners. The fact that the representation/appeal is pending before the appellate authority since February, 1995, without any' relief to the petitioners makes the alternate remedy illusory and inadequate. According to the petitioners, for some period this allowance was paid to them but was discontinued later.
8. In the light of the above discussion, this writ petition is accepted and respondents are directed to pay overtime allowance to the petitioners in accordance with the directions of the Government as contained in the aforesaid circular letters. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
H.B.T./M-99/L Petition accepted.