' NASIR SAEED SHEIKH, J.--- Muhammad Aslam Janjua appellant is the father of Tallat Mehmood Janjua and the later was employed with the respondent No,2 and unfortunately died in November 2005 at the age of 30 year. Late Tallat Mehmood Januja was originally employed on contract basis as Community Based-Monitor in BPS-12 with the respondent No,2 on 30-9-2003. His services were later on extended vide order dated 3-10-2005 Annexure-E. His selection was made through prescribed procedure on the basis of interview conducted by the Selection Committee duly constituted by the Government of Punjab.
2. The father of the petitioner requested for financial assistance of Rs,400,000 which was admissible to other government employees who die during their service tenure by virtue of Finance Department Circular dated 10-11-2004. This request of the petitioner was declined on the ground that the financial assistance envisaged by the Circular dated 10-11-2004 is admissible to civil servants only and contract employees are not entitled to any such financial assistance. The petitioner ultimately instituted a Writ Petition No,1728 of 2008 against the respondents before this Court. Parawise comments were submitted by the respondent No,1 and in paragraph No,7 of the reply the following contentions were raised:--- "Contents of Para-7 are admitted being facts on record, The Finance Department clarified that Late Tallat Mehmood Janjua being a contract employee was not entitled for financial assistance vide Para 2(ii) Government of the Punjab Finance Department Letter No,FD-SR-1/3- 10/2004 dated 15-8- 2007 (Annexure-A). Likewise under section vi(vii) of Government of the Punjab S&GAD Circular Letter No,DS(O&M.)5- 3/2004/contract (ME) dated 29th December, 2004 (Annexure-B) persons appointed on contract basis are not civil servant."
' A learned single Judge of this Court through the impugned order dated 12-12-2008 dismissed the writ petition of the petitioner.
3. The present appeal has been directed against the order dated 12-12-2008 passed in Writ Petition No,1728 of 2008.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that vide notification dated 13-2-2009 the financial assistance to the family of contract employees who died during the service has been extended to the contract employees by the Government of the Punjab therefore the appellant is entitled to the grant of the financial assistance relief keeping in view the changed situation. It is further contended that although the son of the appellant was a contract employee but for all practical purposes his job was that of a civil servant and in view of the fresh notification dated 13- 2-2009 the appellant be allowed the relief as prayed for in the writ petition.
5. The learned A.A.-G. Representing the respondents has contended that the appellant's son was a contract employee and he was employed against a fixed pay package and was not entitled to the benefit of the financial assistance as per notification dated 10-11-2004. It is further argued by the learned A.A.-G. That the appellant is not entitled to the grant of financial assistance as per government policy. It is further argued by the learned A.A.-G. That the benefit of a subsequently issued notification dated 13-2-2009 cannot be extended to the case of the son of the appellant as he died in the year 2005 much before the new notification dated 13-2-2009 whereby the benefit of financial assistance was extended to the families of contract employees who die during service.
6. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.
7. It is not denied that the son of the appellant died during the service tenure with the respondent No,2. We have also gone through the appointment letter of the son of the appellant which has been placed as Annexure-E along with the writ petition whereby the son of the appellant was employed on the terms and conditions that he will draw pay and allowance in BPS-12 in accordance with the 'provisions of Finance Department Government of the Punjab letter dated 22-10-2001 read with Finance Department policy letter dated 16-7-2005. It is also an admitted fact that the son of the appellant was selected for his appointment through proper procedure after test and interview conducted by a duly constituted Selection Committee.
8. There is no basic difference between an ordinary civil servant and a contract employee in the government service. The only difference between the terms and conditions of both of them is that a contract employee works during a specified contract period. The respondents have been themselves admittedly extending the period of the employment of the son of the appellant. The financial assistance provided to the family of civil servants who die during their period of employment is an ex-gratia grant for providing financial assistance to the bereaved family. The case of the appellant is sub judice ever since the year 2008 and during the pendency of the instant I.C.A. a new notification has been issued by the Government of Punjab dated 13-2-2009 whereby this grant of financial assistance has been extended to the family of the contract employees as well who die while in service. A notification by the government which confers certain advantage upon the employees can be given retrospective effect and enforcement and the fresh notification dated 13-2-2009 provides in clause (1) as follows:--- "(XIII-A) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE FAMILY OF A CONTRACT EMPLOYEE WHO DIES WHILE IN SERVICE.--- Financial assistance shall be provided to the family of a contract employee who dies while in service according to the following terms and conditions:-
(i) Financial assistance in accordance with Finance Department's circular letter No,FD.SR.1/3-10/ 2004, dated 10-11-2004 in the case of death of a contract employee during his service. In case of a contract employee serving in a district, the sanction order shall be issued by the District Coordination Officer while in case of a contract employee serving at the provincial level; the Administrative Secretary shall issue the sanction order in respect of the employee."
9. This beneficial notification dated 13-2-2009 has been connected with the previous notification dated 10-11-2004 and is in continuation of the earlier notification. The effect of the notification dated 13-2-2009 is the extending of the benefit as provided for in the earlier notification dated 10- 11-2004 to the families of the contract employees who die during the tenure of their employment.
This notification dated 13-2-2009 thus can be interpreted to extend the benefit of financial assistance to the case of the son of the appellant as well. The learned A.A.-G. Could not point out any legal impediment in allowing the benefit of the earlier notification dated 10-11-2004 read with the fresh notification dated 13-2-2009 to the case of the son of the present appellant.
10. In view of the above we are persuaded to allow the instant I.C.A. And direct the respondents to provide financial assistance as per notification dated 10-11-2004 to the family of the son of the appellant as well. The needful are done by the respondents expeditiously as far as possible within a period of two months. The instant I.C.A. Is therefore, allowed with the above mentioned observations and directions.