1. MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J.--- This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by District Judge, Mirpur dated 14-5-2007 through which the suit filed by the present appellant against the respondents was dismissed.
2. 2.Brief facts forming background of the instant appeal are that the present appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.55,28,089 against the respondents in the court of District Judge Mirpur, stating therein that the plaintiff is a Public Limited Company situated at Mirpur Chechian Road Bunkhurman and was registered with Employees Old Age Benefits Institution (E.O.B.I) on 19-1-1991.
3. Respondents/defendants Nos.2 and 3 who are officers of respondent No.4 have been receiving amount regarding Old Age Benefits from the appellant/plaintiff since September, 1990. It was further stated that Hon'ble High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir has held in a Writ Petition No.24 of 1991 filed on 25-4-1991 decided on 13-2-1999 titled Messrs Hafiz Textile Mills v. Assistant Collector and others that E.O.B.I. Act was enforced in AJ&K from 12-7-1995 and the payment to the institution should be made from 12-7-1995. Respondents/defendants have received Rs.55,28,089 from the appellant/plaintiff before 12-7-1995, which was against law and the appellant/plaintiff was entitled to recovery of the said amount. The plaintiff prayed to issue a decree for the same.
4. 3.Respondents/defendants submitted written statement, stating therein that officers of the institution are not authorized to collect any money. An employer deposits the contribution in the concerned branch of the bank. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of AJ&K has been challenged before the apex Court of AJ&K. A review petition is sub judice before the Hon'ble apex Court. The respondents/defendants prayed to dismiss the suit. An amended written statement was also submitted wherein it was alleged that AJ&K Council was the necessary party, which has not been impleaded in the suit and due to which the suit was not maintainable. E.O.B.I. Act, 1980 was adopted by AJ&K Council in 1976 and has been enforced in AJ&K since 1976. Retired employees of the appellant/plaintiff have been receiving pension and the plaintiff has been sending the cases of pension of its retired employees continuously to the respondents/defendants. So, the suit is hit by the principle of estoppel. The suit has been filed in violation of section 6 of the General Clauses Act.
5. The plaintiff has got no cause of action. The Hon'ble apex Court has reviewed the judgment and revival of pension scheme is under consideration of AJ&K Council.
6. 4.Issues were framed having in view the version of the parties. After hearing the parties, the learned District Judge Mirpur dismissed the suit declaring that the appellant/plaintiff has got no cause of action and the suit is barred by section 6 of the General Clauses Act. Hence, the instant appeal.
7. 5.Arguments were advanced by the learned counsel for the parties who only repeated their version as taken in the pleadings. No need is required to produce the said arguments in black and white.
8. 6.After hearing the arguments, I have gone through the record minutely. The record reveals that the High Court of AJ&K held in its above-mentioned judgment that E.O.B.I. Act was enforced on 12-7- 1995, so the recovery of contribution could be made from 12-7-1995. The Supreme Court of AJ&K has reviewed its judgment on 21-6-2001 and it was held in para 7 of the judgment as under:--- "therefore we accept the review petition and held that the observations made in paragraph 26 of the judgment under review, whereby the Act 10 of 1980 has been held violative of the Interim Constitution Act as a whole is amended. In terms that only the 2nd term of section 2 of the said Act is void as being violative of the Interim Constitution Act and the rest of the provisions of the said Act are valid. Consequently Validating Act 3 of 1985 is also valid to the extent of aforesaid amendment in the impugned judgment."
9. So, having in view the above-mentioned observation, it is clear that rights of the employees, privileges, obligations or liabilities acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment will not be effected. The respondents/defendants are still fulfilling their obligations by making payments to old-age employees. Section 6 of General Clauses Act indicates that if any enactment is repealed, it shall not affect the rights and liabilities already accrued. The apex Court of AJ&K has declared through the precedent 2011 PLC (C.S.) 11 that Act 10 of 1980 with Act 3 of 1985 as valid. Moreover, the appellant/plaintiff has been contributing continuously the amount regarding pension of its retired employees through the respondents/ defendants. It was observed by the apex Court that E.O.B.I.
10. Act is valid since July, 1980. So, the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for refund of deposited contribution prior to 12-7-1995 fails being devoid of merit. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared only 2nd part of section 2 of E.O.B.I. Act as violative of Interim Constitution Act. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council is quite competent to remove any difficulty and the record reveals that matter is under consideration of the Council to revive the pension scheme in AJ&K territory. It is clear that rights, privileges and liabilities acquired to the retired employees of the appellant/plaintiff are intact.
11. Having in view the above discussed circumstances, the findings recorded by the learned District Judge Mirpur are based on sound and cogent reasons, which need no indulgence by this court.
12. The instant appeal stands dismissed with no order as to the costs.