Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUSHTAQ AHMAD CHAUDHRY VS Respondent: SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD
1995 P L C (C
1995 P L C (C.S.) 657
(Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Mir Hazar Khan Khoso and Muhammad Munir Khan, JJ
MUSHTAQ AHMAD CHAUDHRY
versus
SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD and others
Civil Petition No. 74‑Q of 1994, decided on 23rd August, 1994.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 1‑8‑1994 of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in C.P. No. 109 of 1994).
Civil service‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 3 ‑‑‑Payment of Secretariat Allowance‑‑‑Entitlement‑‑‑Claim to payment of Secretariat allowance was based on the plea that civil servants counter‑part in other Provinces were being paid such allowance and the same was also being paid to employee of other departments‑‑‑Civil servants further contention was that they having not drawn secretariat allowance, on 31st May, 1994, they would not be extended the same benefit by the Finance Act, 1994.‑‑point raised needed consideration‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted with direction that interim relief of Secretariat Allowance from 31st, May, 1994 till disposal of case be granted to civil servants subject to condition that in case the Court finally held that civil servants were hot entitled to payment of Secretariat Allowance, same would be recovered from them.
Tahir Muhammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehta W.N. Kohli, Advocate‑on-Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
ORDER
MIR HAZAR KHAN KHOSO, J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1‑8‑1994 passed by a Division Bench of the Balochistan High Court which was pleased to dismiss the constitution petition, moved by the petitioners, in limine.
2. The grievance of Mr. Tahir Muhammad Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that his clients are entitled to payment of 20% Secretariat Allowance which is being paid to their counterparts in other provinces, besides the same allowance is paid to employees of other departments. He contended that as his clients were not drawing the secretariat allowance on 31st May, 1994 they will not be extended the same benefit by the Finance Act of 1994.
3. Since the point raised needs consideration, we are, therefore, inclined to grant leave. As counterparts of the petitioners are already getting 20% secretariat allowance, we are, therefore, inclined to give interim relief to the petitioners of drawing 20% secretariat allowance from 31st May, 1994 till the disposal of the case subject to the condition that in case the Court finally holds that the petitioners are not entitled to payment of secretarial allowance, the same will be recovered from them.
AA./M‑2156/L Leave granted