2016 G B L R 37
Before Dr. RanaMuhammad Shamim, C.J., Javed Iqbal and Shahbaz Khan, JJ
SECRETARY LAW ANDPROSECUTION GILGIT-BALTISTAN and 3 others—Petitioners
ASLAM KHAN,SUPERINTENDENT, CUSTOMS AND BANKING COURT, GILGIT and 15 others—Respondents
C. Misc. No. 86 of 2014 inC.P.L.A. No. 90 of 2014, heard on 5th September, 2016.
—-Judicial allowance andspecial judicial allowance—Entitlement to—Writ petition by the employees invarious categories in BPS-1 to 16 of the Customs and Banking Court, withcontentions that they were entitled to all the benefits i.e. Judicial Allowanceand Special Judicial Allowance; equal to three time of their substantive payscale was allowed by the Chief Court—Validity—Advocate-General, could notpoint out any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment—ClaimedJudicial/Special Judicial Allowance was paid to all the court staff andofficials in all the Provinces of Pakistan, Islamabad Capital; as well as tothe staff of officers of Supreme Appellate Court and Supreme Court of Pakistanbut the government of Gilgit-Baltistan, in the present case failed to treatequally among equals—Leave to appeal was dismissed by the Supreme AppellateCourt and judgment passed by the Chief Court was maintained—Authorities weredirected to pay/release all back benefits in shape of arrears.
Advocate-General along with Ali Nazar Khan,Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Date of hearing: 5th September, 2016.
DR. RANA MUHAMMAD SHAMIM, C.J.—The learned AdvocateGeneral contends that the respondents are the employees in various categoriesin BPS-01 to 16 of the Customs and Banking Court, Gilgit-Baltistan who filed aWrit Petition No. 103/2013 with the contentions that they are entitled to allthe benefits i.e. Judicial Allowance and Special Judicial Allowance equal tothree time of their substantive pay scale while setting aside the letter No.SO-14 (1) CBC/2013 dated 05.11.2013 issued by the petitioner No. 01. The saidWrit Petition of the respondents was allowed vide impugned judgment dated28.05.2014. The petitioners being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the saidimpugned judgment filed this petition for leave to appeal and the petition washeard today.
2. The learned Advocate General contends that the respondentshave not obtained the Ex-post facto sanction from the competent authority i.e.the Government of Gilgit-Baltistan. He also contends that the Judge of theCustoms and Banking Court has no authority to sanction the Judicial/SpecialAllowance in favour of the employees of Customs and Banking CourtGilgit-Baltistan and the sanction order No. Law-SO-14(1)/CBC/2013 dated05.11.2013 being devoid of legal sanction was not tenable and liable to be setaside. He further contends that the learned Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court videimpugned judgment dated 28.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 103/2013 has wronglyallowed the said Writ Petition which is required to be set aside being not wellreasoned and well founded.
3. We have heard the learned Advocate General at length,perused the record of the case file and gone through the impugned judgmentdated 28.05.2014 in Writ Petition No.103/2013 passed by the learnedGilgit-Baltistan Chief Court. The learned Advocate General could not point outany infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment dated 28.05.2014. TheJudicial/Special Judicial Allowance is paid to all the court staff andofficials in all the Provinces of Pakistan, Islamabad Capital, as well as tothe staff and officers of this court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Why theGilgit-Baltistan Government is not treating equally among the equals?
In view of the above, we are not inclined to grant leave.The leave to appeal is accordingly refused. The impugned judgment dated28.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 10/2013 passed by the learned Gilgit-BaltistanChief Court is maintained. The petitioners are directed to pay/release all theback benefits in shape of arrears, if any, and keep paying on account ofJudicial/Special Judicial Allowances to the respondents from the date asextended to other employees/staff/officers of District Judiciary, Gilgit-BaltistanChief Court and Supreme Appellate Court Gilgit-Baltistan.
The leave is refused.