' MUHAMMAD ASHRAF BHATTI, J.--- This common order is intended to dispose of Writ Petitions Nos.2994/S of 2006/BWP, 2915/S of 2006/BWP and 2993/S of 2006/BWP as common questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions.
2. Briefly stated, the facts, as common, of these writ petitions are that petitioners were employees in the Municipal Committee, Yazman as Octroi Clerks but in view of Government policy circulated vide Letter No, SOVI(LG)2-179/97, dated 20-9-1999, providing a package/incentive for voluntary retirement, they opted for voluntary retirement and availed of the benefits of ensuing therefrom.
But later on, when the aforesaid policy was held in abeyance vide orders passed on 20-9-1999, they approached the then Municipal Committee to get recalled the orders of their voluntary retirement, as they were ready to pay back the gratuity etc. And other emoluments. This request was not acceded to. They appealed before the then Deputy Commissioner who accepted their request in the following conditions:---
(i) Appellant shall repay amount of pension gratuity with interest.
(ii) Intervening period will be treated as earned leave on half pay.
3. Instead of compliance of above conditions, the petitioners chose to approach the Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development, Lahore to seek reversal of the "return of order of gratuity etc." with interest or in the alternative sought for payment of the same in instalments, but in vain.
Hence, the above writ petitions, particularly having based their case on a decision passed by this Court in Writ Petition No,4805 of 2001, the facts of which are identical to the petitions in hand.
4. While opposing these petitions, it is contended by the learned Law Officer submits that the same are hit by latches. According to him, the petitioners remained dormant on their own and have now approached this Court after lapse of five years; therefore, in the wake of institutional and structural changes after the devolution, the orders passed in appeal have gone infructuous by afflux of considerable time.
5. When faced with the above position of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that grievance of the petitioners would be redressed if direction is passed that the petitioners, if make representations to the quarters concerned for rejoining the T.M.A. (as reconstituted after devolution) on compliance on their part of the conditions as set out in the order passed by the then Deputy Commissioner on 31-7-2000, the same shall be dealt with and disposed of after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, treating it a case of hardship and that then the petitioners shall have no objection to disposal of these petitions.
6. In the light of the above, let a copy each of the above cited writ petitions along with Annexures be sent at the petitioners' expense to the respondent No,1 and others with the direction that the respondent No,1 shall treat these petitions as representations/ written requests on the part of the petitioners, hear them and then treating it a case of hardship dispose them of in accordance with law with a view to explore possibility to accommodating them subject to compliance of the aforesaid order of the then Deputy Commissioner dated 31-7-2000.
7. In the light of the above terms, these petitions are disposed of.