' Precisely the facts of the instant case are that petitioner stood superannuated as Assistant Professor of Economics (BPS-18) from respondent-University of Education, Multan Campus, on 10.09.2014 and the grievance highlighted through this writ petition is that despite expiry of almost one year her pension case has not be finalized.
2. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Law Officer and examined the available record.
3. Before proceeding further, it may be mentioned here that preparation of pension case of a government employee is regulated by The West Pakistan Civil Servants Pension Rules, 1963.
Relevant Rules 5.7 and 5.8 under (Chapter-V. Application for grant of pension) are reproduced here under for facility of reference:- "5. 7 (i) A pension/gratuity which is certified by the Audit Officer shall be sanctioned by the authority competent to sanction the pension.
(ii) Orders sanctioning the pension may issue not more than one month in advance of the due date of retirement and the Audit Officer may issue the pension/pension payment order not more than a fortnight in advance thereof to the Treasury Officer who is to pay the pension/gratuity.
5.8. Date of commencement of pension-Apart from special orders, an ordinary pension is payment from the date on which the pensioner ceases to be in Government service. A gratuity (other than anticipatory gratuity) shall be paid in a single sum."
' It is thus quite obvious that pension of a retired government employee has to be sanctioned one month in advance of the due date of his retirement and final payment order must be issued not more than a fortnight in advance thereof. Furthermore, the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case "Secretary, Government Of Punjab, Finance Department and 269 others versus M. Ismail Tayer and 269 others" (2015 PLC (C.S) 296), in clear words held that pension is not a bounty or an ex-gratia payment but a right acquired in consideration of past services. It was a vested right and a legitimate expectation of a retiring civil servant, the same being a right conferred by law, could not be arbitrarily abridged or reduced except in accordance with law.
4. Keeping in mind the above legal aspects, respondents' authorities were directed to submit report and parawise comments. After going through the report submitted on behalf of Respondents No. 4 and 5 (University authorities), it is observed that successful completion of service tenure by the petitioner is a fact not disputed by them. Similarly, there is no plea available with respondents authorities that the petitioner carried any stigmatic service record, that any departmental inquiry was either pending or was in the offing or that in any way the petitioner herself contributed towards delayed finalization of her Pension case. As such, no explanation, worth the name, has been put before the Court from respondents authorities as to why the pension case of the present petitioner was not finalized despite passage of nearly one year. Rather, it has been observed that in their earlier report/parawise comments the respondents-University of Education had tried to play deception with this Court by stating that there is no tendency on their part and complete cases of the petitioner has been forwarded to the concerned quarters well in time. Subsequently, however, when the Higher Education Department, Government of Punjab denied receipt of any such record in their office, it was only then that the University of Education authorities admitted their fault, thus the malafide on the part of the official respondents is manifest from their record itself.
5. In the case "Haji Muhammad Ismail Memon, Advocate* (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 226 of 2006) reported in PLD 2007 Supreme Court 35), the apex Court while taking notice of slackness on the part of the government department in preparation of pension papers of the retired government employees expressed utter dismay as under:-- "It is pathetic condition that Government servants, after having served for a considerable long period during which they give their blood and sweat to the department had to die in a miserable condition on account of non payment of pension/expansionary benefits etc. The responsibility, of course, can be fixed upon the persons who were directly responsible for the same but at the same time we are of the opinion that it is an over all problem mostly in every department, where public functionaries failed to play their due role even in accordance with law. Resultant, good governance is suffering badly. Thus every one who is responsible in any manner in delaying the case of such retired officers/official or widows or orphan children for the recovery of pension/gratuity and G.P.
Fund has to be penalized. -As their such lethargic action is in violation of Articles 9 and 14 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Admittedly it is against the dignity of a human being that he has to die in miserable condition and for about three years no action has been taken by the concerned quarters in finalizing the pension case and now when the matter came up before the Court, for the first time, they are moving in different directions just to show their efficiency and to clear their position before the Court. Such conduct on their behalf is highly condemn able and cannot be encouraged in any manner."
' In order to set guidelines for future, the apex Court in the said judgment issued the following directions:-- "We, therefore, direct that all the Government Departments, Agencies and Officers deployed to serve the general public within the limit by the Constitution as well as by the law shall not cause unnecessary hurdle or delay in finalizing the payment of expansionary/retirement benefit cases in future and violation of these directions shall amount to criminal negligence and dereliction of the duty assigned to them."
' For strict adherence to the above verdict, specific directions were issued to all the Chief Secretaries of the Provincial Governments as well as the Accountant Generals and the Account General Pakistan Revenue, Islamabad, to clear pension cases within a period not more than two weeks without fail.
6. But, as shall be seen from the facts of instant case, exactly on same lines the respondents authorities paid no heed to the directions of the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan, when the matter has come before this Court, they tried to shuffle their responsibility, as according to University of Education all the relevant papers were sent to the Secretary Higher Education and the stance of Higher Education Department is that pension case of the petitioner was not received to them, rather through letter dated 28th of August, 2015, the Registrar University of Education was requested to provide the papers, but he failed. In this respect a copy of written apology on behalf of Respondents No. 4 and 5 has been tendered, wherein, it is clearly mentioned that as a matter of fact one Additional Director (Admn), University of Education, had provided false information about forwarding of petitioner's pension papers and as the said official was found responsible for delay, therefore, he has been asked to submit his resignation, he has resigned from office and the said issue is in the process. In any way, slackness and then concealment of facts on the part of official respondents is apparent from the record produced by them.
7. Be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that pension has not been paid to the petitioner despite expiry of about one year after her retirement and thus the petitioner has suffered agony for a long period without their being any fault on her part. Furthermore the documents now available on the file, go on to establish that such delay occurred mainly due to the inefficiency or slackness on the part of respondents authorities, therefore, this is deemed to be a fit case for initiation of criminal proceedings as well as simultaneous action for gross contempt of the above cited judgment of the apex Court. However, instead of opting for criminal action or contempt proceedings against the concerned officials, this writ petition is allowed in the terms prayed for, and in order to set an example and to convey an alert for future to the government functionaries deliberately delaying the pension cases of retired employees for their nefarious designs, I order that costs of Rs. 100,000/- be paid to the petitioner by the Government of Punjab through Secretary Education within six months from today.
' It is however, for the Government of Punjab to recover the said amount from University of Education, Lahore.