MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J-Brief facts leading to this writ petition are that petitioner No. 1 Mst.
Ishrat Begum was appointed as PTC teacher on 30.9.1993. She was dismissed from service vide order dated 23.1.1999 by the Deputy District Education Officer (W), Tehsil Layyah. Sher filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal, Punjab, Lahore, which was accepted vide judgment dated 4.6.2003 wherein it was directed that she be reinstated in service with immediate effect, in pursuance of the said judgment, she was reinstated by the order of respondent No. 3, dated 31 7.2003 and she re-joined on 1.8.2003 and she is performing her duties since 1.8.2003.
2. Mst. Iram Rubab petitioner No. 2 is PET. She was removed from service, by respondent No. 2. She was reinstated in service by respondent No. 1 vide order dated 14.7.2003. She rejoined on 27.8.2003 and since then, she is performing her duties.
3. Mst. Shahida Parveen petitioner No. 3 was appointed as PTC teacher on 26.1.1993. Later on she was removed from service. She was reinstated by respondent No. 2 vide order dated 5.4.2003. She rejoined on 5.4.2003 and since then, she is performing her duties.
4. Through this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed that respondent No. 3 be directed to release their monthly salaries for the above mentioned period.
5. Report and parawise comments were called from respondent No 3 Mst. Shamim Sarwar DDEO
(W) Tehsil Layyah, which were received and were not favourable to the petitioners. Later on vide letter dated 19.3.2004 comments entirely favourable to the petitioners were submitted by the lady who had succeeded D.D.E.O. (W.E.E), Tehsil, Layyah.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the salaries of the petitioners cannot be withheld on the ground that their reinstatement orders were illegal and that withholding of salaries is against Islam which envisages payment of wages before sweat to toil is dried up. Reliance in this respect is placed upon Mst. Zaib-un-Nisa Vs. The Government of the Punjab, Department of Education through Secretary and 4 others (1995 CLC 1281) and Administrator, District Council, Larkana and another Vs. Ghulab Khan and 5 others (2001 SCM R 1320). He further submitted that as the comments submitted by the lady who had succeeded Mst. Shamim Sarwar DDEO (W), Layyah, namely, Mrs. Saeeda Khanam, were entirely favourable to the petitioners, they are as such entitled to the salaries for the above mentioned period.
7. On the other hand, the learned AAG has admitted that the petitioners are performing their duties fr6m the dates of their reinstatement in service uptill now but monthly salaries have not been paid to them and has also supported the comments submitted by Mrs. Saeeda Khanam now Deputy Education Officer (W), Tehsil Layyah/respondent No. 3.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, counsel for Mrs. Shamim Sarwar, Ex-Deputy District Education Officer (W), Tehsil Layyah and also the learned AAG.
9. Perusal of the comments submitted by Mrs. Saeeda Khanam now Deputy District Education Officer (W), Tehsil Layyah/respondent No. 3 reveals that the petitioners are performing their duties from the dates of their reinstatement in service uptill now but the monthly salaries have not been paid them, as is also admitted by the learned AAG. The present situation, where the petitioners are made to work without payment of salary is against Islam which envisages payment of wages before sweat to toil is dried up. The performance of duties under these circumstances may also amount of forced labour which is forbidden by Article 11 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which states that "all forms of forced labour and traffic in human being are prohibited". The salaries of the petitioners cannot be withheld on the ground that their reinstatement orders were illegal. The support of this proposition, reliance is placed on Administrator, District Council, Larkana and another Vs. Ghulam Khan and 5 others (2001 SCM R 1320). Even otherwise pursuant to the result of a novo inquiry conducted vide letter No. 690, dated 30.10.2003 in accordance with the order of the Punjab Service Tribunal (Annexures A & D), the petitioners were exonerated from the charges.
10. In the light of the above discussion, this writ petition is accepted. Respondent No. 3 Deputy District Education Officer (WEE), Tehsil Layyah, District Layyah is directed to immediately release the salaries of the petitioners from the dates of their reinstatement in services uptill now on the basis of their pay scale. However, there shall be no order as to costs.