' MOAZZAM HAYAT (MEMBER).--- With this judgment we shall decide the above titled appeals. All these appeals have been filed by the retired employees of State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan. A common question has been made in all these appeals for the revision of pay scales of the appellants w.e.f, 1-1-2000 in line with the decision dated 28-9-2000 and for re-calculation of their retirement benefits. A further prayer is made for restoration of medical facilities as ordered by the Federal Ombudsman and revision of their pay and pension in accordance with the latest increase in pay given by the Corporation to its employees.
2. As mentioned above all the appellants were in service of the State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan, hereinafter called the respondent. The respondents introduced a voluntary retirement separation scheme for its employees and officers. Under this scheme the employees and officers could get premature retirement on payment of certain benefits. The appellants opted for retirement under this scheme. Their options were accepted and they were retired w.e.f, 5-12-2000.
Their grievance is that they were not granted full retirement benefits.
3. The appeals are resisted by the respondents. It is submitted that all the benefits which were legally permissible under the scheme had been granted to the appellants and since they have received all such benefits, therefore, they are not entitled to file the present appeals.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
5. It appears to us that after the retirement of the appellants on 5-12-2000 the respondents enforced a revised pay structure for its A officers and staff. This structure was to be implemented w.e.f, 1-1-2000 and was admissible to the officers who were in service as on 31-12-2000. The learned counsel for the appellants has maintained that the pay structure was made effective from 1-1- 2000 and the appellants had retired on 5-12-2000, therefore, it was applicable to them also and their pay and pension should have been fixed under this pay structure. In this regard he has placed on record a judgment of the apex Court dated 3-4-2001 passed in C.Ps. Nos. 1110 to 1114 of 2001.
6. We have gone through the judgment of the apex Court relied upon by the appellants. The issue before the apex Court was of the employees of the State Bank of Pakistan. These employees had obtained premature retirement under voluntary Golden Hand Shake Scheme floated by the State Bank of Pakistan vide its Circular No,9 dated 23-10-1997. The said employees were relieved from service by the State Bank on 15-12-1997. Meanwhile a revised salary structure was issued by the State Bank which was made effective from 1-12-1997. The employees were not granted pensionary benefits on the basis of this revised salary structure made effective from 1-12-1997 notwithstanding the fact that they had been relieved from service on 15-12-1997. It was held by the apex Court that since the employees had been paid salary at revised rates for the period from 1-12-1997 to 15-12- 1997, therefore their pensionary benefits should have been calculated on the basis of pay they had received for the period from 1-12-1997 to 15-12-1997. We are afraid this ruling of the apex Court does not help the appellants in any manner. The appellants had given undertakings to the respondents by which they had voluntarily relinquished their claims for fixation of their pay and other benefits on the basis of revised pay structure. This undertaking is very important and is reproduced in verbatim as under:--- "I, Wali-ur-Rehman son of Gul Muhammad Khan, PR No,20407-9 Division Department, PO/Zone Central Zone Retiring/Separating my services with State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan under Voluntary Retirement/Separation Scheme with effect from 3-12-2000 do hereby undertake and bind myself, my legal heirs, successors, legal representatives, assignees and administrators that I shall not be entitled to any revised pay scales, allowances and fringe benefits if granted by the State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan with retrospective effect to the officers who have not opted for Voluntary Retirement and who would be in the service of the Corporation on 31-12- 2000. I hereby acknowledge that I have received my dues in terms of Circular No,P&GS /P0/20/2000 dated 15-11-2000 and I shall have no claim, right or entitlement or all times to come against the Corporation in respect of any revised pay scales, allowances and fringe benefits, if granted by the Corporation to its employees."
(This undertaking is of appellant Wali-ur-Rehman. But all the appellants had given similar undertakings).
7. It shall thus be seen that the appellants had given a clear undertaking that they would not make any claim of any nature even if pay scales were revised with retrospective effect. In the presence of this undertaking the appellants cannot claim refutation of their pay and pensionary benefits on this ground that a new pay structure had been introduced w.e.f, 1-1-2000. The facts of the present case are totally different from the facts of the case relied upon by the appellants.
8. It is argued that the undertaking given by the appellants was an agreement which was void because of its uncertainty. In this regard reference has been made to Section 29 of the Contract Act. According to this Section "agreements, meaning of which is not certain, or capable or being made certain, or void." We have perused the undertaking given by the appellants. The meaning of this undertaking is very clear. It is neither ambiguous nor uncertain. The appellants had voluntarily relinquished their claims, past and future. This is the reason that the words "retrospective effect" have been used in this undertaking. In the circumstances section 29 of the Contract Act does not come to the rescue of the appellants.
9. For the above reasons we find that the appellants are not justified in filing the present appeals for refixation of pay and pensionary benefits on the basis of pay structure enforced w.e.f, 1-1-2000.
10. The learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that it is a case of clear discrimination as the present employees are getting much more than the appellants as pay and other benefits including pension. According to him Article 25 of Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has been violated by the respondents. We do not find any force in this argument. It is not a case of discrimination. On the contrary the appellants had taken pensionary benefits under a scheme which was voluntarily accepted by them to their advantage. After acceptance of this scheme and giving up their claims they cannot plead discrimination. The argument is repelled.
11. As regards the restoration of medical facilities it is stated that in this regard the order of Federal Ombudsman had been violated by the respondents. The Federal Ombudsman has powers to implement his judgment. The appellants can approach the Federal Ombudsman if they are of the view that his order regarding medical facilities has been violated.
12. The impugned order was passed on 15-1-2000 but the departmental appeals were filed on 30- 5-2001 and 18-8-2001. As such these appeals were not filed within the stipulated period. It is an established law that where departmental appeal is not filed in time the appeal in this Tribunal is not competent. Reliance is placed on 1995 SCM R 1505. The present appeals are thus not competent.
12-A. The departmental appeals were rejected on 10-10-2001 and 31-5-2002. The appeals were to be filed within 30-days starting from 10-10-2001 and 31-5-2002 but were filed on 15-11-2002, 29-3- 2003 and 22-5-2003. The appeals are thus barred by time. The result is that the appeals are held to be time-barred.
'13. For the above reasons the appeals are dismissed at preliminary stage as incompetent, time- barred and being without any merit.
14. Parties be informed.