' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The respondent was originally an Assistant Accounts Officer in the Office of Auditor-General of Pakistan who proceeded on leave preparatory to retirement w,e,f, 13-1-1984 for a period of one year. Before the expiry of leave preparatory to retirement, he was re- employed by the Civil Aviation Authority as Deputy Manager (Accounts) in pay group (BPS-17) on 28th of October, 1984. After service of nine years, eight months and twelve days, he finally retired on 15-3-1995 from the post of Cooperative Manager Finance in pay group BPS-18. He was paid gratuity only. Therefore, he filed Constitutional Petition No,D-1469 of 2006 in the High Court of Sindh at Karachi claiming his pensionary benefits for his service of about ten years. The High Court, vide impugned judgment dated 15-9-2008, allowed the constitutional petition and directed the petitioners to calculate pensionary benefits of the respondents in accordance with rules as if it was one pension for both the periods of service rendered by him with the Auditor-General of Pakistan as well as Civil Aviation Authority. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
2. The learned counsel vehemently argued that the constitutional petition suffered from gross laches as the petitioner came .Forward with a delay of seven years after receiving his gratuity without any demur. The principle of estoppel was also attracted in this case as he had accepted and received retirement benefits without any claim for pension.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and have also perused the available record. Admittedly, the respondent joined the service of petitioner while he was still in the service of Auditor-General of Pakistan and his leave preparatory to retirement had not yet expired.
In view of the length of his service for about 10 years, the High Court was justified on equitable grounds, to direct the petitioner to grant pensionary benefits to the respondent. Needless to observe that his appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal remained pending for a considerable period when the same stood abated in view of A the law laid down by this Court in Mobeen-ul- Islam's case PLD 2006 SC 602. Therefore, the question of laches would not arise in this case in our view, the impugned judgment is just and fair to which no exception can be taken. The other points of law raised by the learned counsel such as application of the Civil Service Regulations to the employees of Civil Aviation Authority are left to be examined in some other appropriate case.
4. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.