Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NAZAR HUSSAIN VS Respondent: CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS BOARD/SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, ISLAMABAD
1992 P L C (C
1992 P L C (C.S.) 207
[Service Tribunal Punjab]
Present: Syed Ally Madad Shah, Chairman and Ch. Hasan Nawaz, Member
Syed NAZAR HUSSAIN
Versus
CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS BOARD/SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, ISLAMABAD and 2 others
Appeal No. 432(R) of 1990, decided on 19th August, 1991.
(a) Revised Leave Rules, 1980---
----R. 18-A---Grant of six months encashment in lieu of leave preparatory to retirement---Entitlement---Encashment could be allowed as compensation for work done or duty performed by civil servant during whole period of three hundred and sixty-five days or lesser period due or admissible as leave preparatory to retirement---Civil servant having never worked for a single day after final retirement, he was not entitled to the claim of encashment.
(b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)---
----S. 4---Appeal---Limitation---Civil servant's departmental remedy stood terminated by 7-6-1990, when he was informed that his request for relaxation of rules could not be acceded to---Civil servant's repeated applications and further time consumed in processing of his case, with no change in the decision did not afford him entitlement to condonation of period of limitation in preferring appeal to Service Tribunal on 18-10-1990---Appeal being patently time-barred was dismissed.
(c) Revised Leave Rules, 1980---
----Rr. 16, 17 & 18-A---Expression "leave preparatory to retirement"-- Connotation---Expression "leave preparatory to retirement" presupposes its admissibility until the day of retirement of civil servant---Civil servant had been given option, if exercised within fifteen months before date of superannuation or thirty years qualifying service for encashing his "leave preparatory to retirement" on his giving undertaking in writing that he would perform duty in lieu of "leave preparatory to retirement" admissible to him, subject, of course, to the maximum period of one hundred and eighty days.
The very expression leave preparatory to retirement pre-supposes its admissibility until the day of retirement of the civil servant. Rule 16 of Revised Leave Rules, 1980 provides the maximum period of LPR of 365 days which may be availed of at the option of the civil servant on full pay, or partly on full pay and partly on half pay, or entirely on half pay. Rule 17 of Revised Leave Rules, 1980 lays down, inter alia, that in case of retirement on superannuation or voluntary retirement on completion of thirty years qualifying service, if a civil servant was not granted, for reasons of public service, LPR duly applied for in sufficient time, he would be granted lump-sum leave pay for the period the LPR was refused, but subject to a maximum of 180 days leave on full pay. Under Rule 18-A, a civil servant has been given option, if exercised fifteen months before the date of superannuation or thirty years qualifying service, for encashing his LPR, on his giving undertaking in writing that he would perform duty in lieu of the LPR admissible to him, but subject to the maximum period of 180 days.
Ali Hussain for Appellant.
S.M. Abdul Wahab for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 1st August, 1991.