' HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.--- This writ petition is filed with the prayer that appropriate writ may be issued directing the respondents to consider and grant the petitioner and other employees of the Federal Service Tribunal, Special Judicial Allowance @ 20%/30% from the date when it was granted to the employees/officers of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, Hon'ble Provincial High Courts with all consequential benefits.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being an employee of the Federal Service Tribunal (FST) in the capacity of Private Secretary to the Member FST, is performing the duties of a judicial nature and there is absolutely no difference in the working of the employees and officers of the office of the Provincial High Courts, Federal Shariat Court, Federal Service Tribunal, Attorney-General for Pakistan as well as Advocate-General. All the employees and officers serving in the Provincial High Courts, Federal Shariat Court and in the offices of Attorney- General for Pakistan as well as Advocate-General were granted special judicial allowance at the rate of 20% of their basic pay, whereas the petitioner and his colleagues who are similarly placed persons are being denied of the same amounts to discrimination and the said discrimination being a violative of specific provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan is liable to be interfered with.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a recent judgment of this Court in the case of Sadaqat Ali v. Government of Punjab and others 2008 PLC (C.S.) 1047 and submits that not only the petitioner but his similarly placed colleagues are also entitled for the same relief, which is extended to the petitioner in Writ Petition No,2237 of 2008. Learned counsel further relies Hameed Akhtar Niazi v. Secretary Establishment Division 1996 SCMR 1185, Khawaja Abdul Hameed Nasir and others v.
National Bank of Pakistan and others 2003 SCMR.
1030. Tara Chand and others v. Karachi Water and Sewerage Board, Karachi and others 2005 SCMR 499, in support of his contentions.
3. On the other hand, learned Deputy Attorney-General opposed the petitioners submissions with particularity of the point of jurisdiction.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. First of all I will advert to the point of jurisdiction.
6. The prayer of the petitioner clearly reveals that neither any final nor appellate order of the departmental authorities is under challenge before this Court rather a direction is sought which can be issued in exercise of powers under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 particularly on the strength of law laid down in a recent case reported as Secretary Revenue v. Muhammad Saleem 2008 SCMR 948.
7. It is further observed that principal object behind all legal formalities is to safeguard the paramount interest of justice-Legal precepts were devised in order to view to impart certainty, consistency B and uniformity, administration of justice-to secure same against arbitrariness, errors of individual judgments and mala fides. In support of this observation, j can rely on a judgment reported as Mrs. Munawar Sanni v. Director Army Education 1991 SCMR 135, Administrator District Council Larkana and others v. Gulab Khan and 5 others 2001 SCMR 1320. In the case of Mrs. Munawar Sanni (supra) despite her status of civil servant she approached the High Court for the redressal of grievance and the jurisdiction was raised even up to the level of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and the same was resolved in the following terms:-- "Question whether she should approach the Civil Court or the Service Tribunal for this purpose was not very pertinent in the face of bound down obligation of the authorities to satisfy her claim themselves without the necessity of driving needy litigants a pillar to post."
8. In the light of judgments of the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan referred above, the objection of maintainability of the writ petition raised by the learned Deputy Attorney-General is repelled.
9. So far the merits of the case is concerned, it is not denied by the respondents that in case of employees of High Court of Lahore, Sindh and Quetta, office of the Attorney-General, Office of the Advocate-General, they are getting the said allowances for which the petitioner is agitating, however, it is contended on behalf of the respondents that they are unaware of the position in respect of the staff of Attorney-General for Pakistan, however, when confronted with the summary dated 12-12-2007 submitted by the Attorney-General for Pakistan the respondents could not advance their case further.
10. To resolve the present controversy the said summary is reproduced as under:-- "Office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan Supreme Court Building, Islamabad.
Summary for the Prime Minister Subject: Grant of incentive allowance at the rate of 20% of basic pay to the officers/staff of the office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan ' In clause (3) of Article 100 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan it shall be the duty of the Attorney-General to give advice to the Federal Government upon such legal matters, and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may be referred or assigned to him by the Federal Government, and the performance of his duties he shall have the right of audience in all Courts and Tribunals in Pakistan.
(2). Under the rules privileges and benefits of the Attorney-General for Pakistan are equal to that of a Judge of the Supreme Court. The rules, benefits and other privileges and the staff of the Attorney- General are applicable to that of the Federal Government employees. On the other hand, the nature of duties, official timing of the staff are applicable to that of the Supreme Court and High Courts, because in the morning to 1-00 .m. The staff remains busy in Courts proceedings along with the Attorney-General and thereafter 1-00 p.m. To late hours, prepare the cases for the next day. It is an admitted fact that the nature of duties of the staff of the Attorney-General's Office is identical to that of employees of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and High Courts. -(3) The honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan has been pleased to grant 20% on their basic pay as Special Judicial Allowance to the employees of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Copy of the notification is attached as Annexure 'A'.
(4) The honourable Chief Justice of the High Court of Lahore, Sindh, Quetta and Peshawar have also been pleased to grant Judicial Allowance to the staff of their respective High Courts at Principal seat as well as its benches. Copy of the notification is attached,as Annexure 'B'.
(5) It is also pertinent to mention here that the Hon'ble Prime Minister of Pakistan has also granted incentive allowance at the rate of 20% of basic pay to the employees of the Federal Tax Ombudsman and Wafaqi Mohtasib. Copy of the notification is attached as Annexure 'C'.
(6) It is submitted that an amount of Rs,47,986 per month is involved for the grant of 20% Special Incentive Allowance to the employees of the Office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan. The amount can be met within the allocated budget and therefore, no budgetary implication is involved in grant of 20% incentive allowance.
(7) The approval of the honourable Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan solicited.
(Malik Muhammad Qayyum) Attorney-General for Pakistan ' Dated 12-12-2007 ' Mr. Khalid Saeed, ' Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Prime Minister Secretariat, Islamabad."
10. The worthy Prime Minister after examining all aspects of the matter as well as recommendations of the Attorney-General for Pakistan decided the matter in favour of the staff of the Office of Attorney-General for Pakistan and in pursuance to that Finance Division, Government of Pakistan issued a letter dated 29-1-2008 in the following terms:-- "Government of Pakistan Finance Division (Regulations Wing)
' Subject:--Grant of Incentive Allowance @ 20% of the basic pay to the officers/staff of the Office of Attorney-General for Pakistan, Islamabad.
' Reference Office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan, Islamabad's letter No,1(1)2007/AGP, dated 28-1-2008 on the subject noted above.
(2) In pursuance of a decision of the Prime Minister received vide Prime Minister's Secretariat U.O.No,4465/PSPM/2007, dated 16th January, 2008, it has been decided to grant Special Incentive Allowance @ 20% of basic pay to the employees of the Office of Attorney-General for Pakistan with immediate effect to be regulated as under:---
(1) It will be admissible during leave as well as preparatory to retirement.
(2) It will not be admissible during extraordinary leave.
(3) It will not be treated as part of pension.
(4) It will cease to be admissible on transfer, posting and deputation outside the Office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan, Islamabad.
(5) It will not be admissible during the period of suspension.
(Muhammad Shafi Awan) Section Officer (R-III) Tele:9262718.
' Secretary/Controlling Officer, Office of the Attorney-General for Pakistan Islamabad ' Fin. Div. U.O. No, F. 14(5)R. 3/2007-060/2008, dated 29th January, 2008."
11. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties as well as, the perusal of the record it is held that the petitioner and his colleagues are being made the subject of discrimination because the similarly placed employees are enjoying the said benefit which the petitioner and his colleagues are claiming but they are being deprived without any cogent reasons and justification.
In such like situation the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan always came for the rescue of aggrieved persons and in that respect the reliance can be placed on a judgment reported as Hussain Badsha and another v. Akhtar Zaman and others 2007 PLC (C.S.) 157 wherein the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan held that "Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 guarantees equal treatment before law and equal protection of law to all citizens similarly placed".
12. In a reported case titled Dr. Munir Ahmad and 37 others v. Government of Pakistan, Finance Division, Islamabad and 4 others 2007 PLC (C.S.) 285, the present honourable Chief Justice held that "concept of equal protection and equality before law is hallmark of the constitutional scheme recognized by not only the Preamble, Objections Resolution, Articles 4, 25 and 27 of the Constitution but also by the Principles of Policy contained in Article 37 of the Constitution-Equal protection and equal treatment of citizens similarly placed is universally accepted and recognized principle, which has been explained by many authors in textbooks and Judges in precedents-Statutory functionaries in a democratic set up cannot make any individual distinction for any extraneous reasons and exercise of discretion must be free of arbitrariness and caprice."
13. In a recent reported case titled Ibrahim Flour and General Mills, District Sheikhupura through Chief Executive v. Government of Punjab through Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Food Department, Lahore and another PLD 2008 Lah. 184, the point of discrimination was thoroughly examined, dilated upon and held "the point of discrimination calls for interference and exercise of powers of judicial review." In addition to the case referred above, I can quote another case-law decided by the apex Court i.e, in a recent case titled as Mehar Muhammad Nawaz v. M.D. Small Business Corporation (C.A.No,427 of 2005) decided on 9-10-2008, the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan held as under:-- "Needless to emphasize that while dealing With the case whereas an aggrieved party alleges discrimination, the Court cannot overlook the implication thereof. Equal treatment of all similarly situated is the basic principle on which rests justice under the law. If even-handed justice is not administered, it can have many adverse and negative effects on the society. It can cause discontentment and frustration. In the social set-up. There can be no denial that social justice is an objective and enshrined in our Constitution."
15. When it is admitted on record that the similarly placed employees of High Courts, Office of the Punjab Bar Councils, Office of Attorney-General for Pakistan, Federal Tax Ombudsman, and Wafaqi Mohtasib are getting the benefits but the petitioner and his colleagues are being deprived of the same, the respondents' action being a violation of Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 cannot remain in field.
16. Viewing from all angles it is held that the petitioner and his colleagues working in the Offices of the Federal Service Tribunal (Principal Seat as well as Camp Offices) are entitled for the relief claimed.
17. Taking strength from the law laid-down by the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in a case titled as Government of Punjab v. Samina Parveen (C.Ps. Nos.71 and 72 of 2008) decided on 29-4- 2008 and the operative part of the judgment is reproduced as under:--- ' It was held by this Court in the case of Hameed Akhtar Niazi v. The Secretary, Establishment Division Government of Pakistan and others 1996 SCMR 1185 that if a Tribunal or this Court decides a point of law relating to the terms and conditions of civil servant who litigated, and there were other civil servants, who may not have taken any legal proceedings, in such a case, the dictates of justice and rule of good governance demand that the benefit of the said decision be extended to other civil servants also, who may not be parties to that litigation instead of compelling them to approach the Tribunal or any other legal forum. This view was reiterated by this Court in the case of Tara Chand and others v. Karachi Water and Sewerage Board, Karachi and others 2005 SCMR 499 and it was held that according to Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 all citizens are equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of law."
18. The writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to extend the said benefit to the petitioner and all employees of the Federal Service Tribunal (Principal Seat as well as Camp Offices) within a period of two months positively from the date when the employees of office of Attorney-General for Pakistan were granted the said benefit i.e, with effect from 29-1-2008.