' AYESHA A. MALIK, J.--- The appellant initially filed the instant ICA in the year, 2010 which was dismissed vide order dated 18.9.2012 on the ground that the ICA was not maintainable. However, the august Supreme Court of Pakistan vide order dated 28.2.2013 remanded the matter to this Court holding that the ICA was maintainable and case may be heard on its merit. Therefore, we have proceeded to hear the matter on its merit.
2. The case of the Appellant is that he retired from service as Senior Executive Vice President ("SEVP") on 6.9.2005 from the Respondent National Bank of Pakistan. At the time of his retirement he was given 10% increase in his salary as SEVP. The Appellant is aggrieved by the 10% increase in his salary on the ground that he was discriminated against as others including one Muhammad Sardar Khawaja who retired on the same date was given a 100% increase. And he was given a much higher increase in salary although both the said Muhammad Sardar Khawaja and the Appellant have been retired as SEVP on the same date. Learned counsel for the Appellant argued that the Appellant is entitled to the same benefit as was given to Muhammad Sardar Khawaja since both retired as SEVP at the same time. Learned counsel relied upon letter dated 21.6.2005 issued by EVP/Group Chief (HRM&AG) National Bank of Pakistan to urge the point that basic pay scale of Muhammad Sardar Khawaja was revised to Rs,1,26,348/- whereas the basic Pay Scale of the Appellant' is only Rs,88,042/-. He submitted that the case of the Appellant is at par with that of Muhammad Sardar Khawaja and he is entitled to the same treatment.
3. .Learned counsel for the Respondent bank has produced office note dated 27.1.2004 to show that Muhammad Sardar Khawaja was promoted to SEVP with effect from 1.1.2002 and at that time his basic pay was Rs,88,000/-. Further argued that at the time of retirement basic pay of Muhammad Sardar Khawaja was Rs,99,330/- whereas the basic pay of the Appellant was Rs,90,330/-. He also submitted that the Appellant was retired on 7.9.2005 while Muhammad Sardar Khawaja was retired on 6.9.2005, with a difference of one day. Learned counsel submitted that the other persons with whom the Appellant is comparing himself were promoted as SEVPs in the year, 2002 whereas the Appellant was promoted one day before his retirement as a special concession. Learned counsel argued that since those persons have been working as SEVPs for some time, their basic pay had increased over the years whereas the Appellant had done no work as SEVP and is not entitled to any increment. He further clarified that some of the persons mentioned in the list as annexed by Respondent No,1 in the report are still working as SEVP with the bank, hence there can be no comparison with them either.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. The basic issue in this appeal is whether the Appellant is entitled to the same pay as Muhammad Sardar Khawaja which grievance as stated was not properly attended to by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order 28.6.2010 passed in W.P. No,14069/2010. The record shows that some of the persons against whom the Appellant claims he is being discriminated against were promoted earlier in time than the Appellant and some continue to serve as SEVPs even today. In terms of paragraph 2 at page 4 of the writ petition the Appellant himself stated that Muhammad Sardar Khawaja was promoted as SEVP in 2004 with effect from 1.12.2002 wt ereas he was promoted on 6.9.2005 and thereafter retired the very next day. In terms of the record the Appellant requested for promotion as SI.O'P from 1.12.2002 instead of 6.9.2005. In response to this request the Respondent Bank informed the Appellant vide letter dated 25.5.2010 that he is not entitled to promotion from 2002 as SEVP as he was not qualified for the promotion. With regard to increase in his pays ale, which by 2010 had become Rs,126,642, the record shows that the Appellant was promoted one day before retirement as a special concession whereas all other persons against whom discrimination is alleged were promoted as SEVP in 2002. This is evident from the 'office note' dated 27.1.2004 wherein the name of Muhammad Sardar Khawaja is also listed along with others. The basic pay scale of all SEVPs was Rs,88,000/- and with the passage of time it increased. The Appellant was promoted on 5.9.2005 and he retired on 6.9.2005 having not worked even one day as SEVP.
Muhammad Sardar Khawaja with whom the Appellant is primarily aggrieved became SEVP on 1.1.2002 and retired on 6.9.2005 having served as SEVP for at least three years. Therefore, no za:e of discrimination is made out.
5. Under the circumstance, the instant ICA is dismissed.