' The decision, dated 25th April, 1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 9, Multan has been challenged in this appeal, whereby the grant from the benevolent fund was increased from Rs, 100 to Rs, 150 p. m.
2. The respondent was invalidated on account of an accident and terminated from service on 14th March, 1979. He was granted Rs, 100 p. m. From the Benevolent Fund. This was done under the Federal Employees Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance Ordinance, 1969. But the learned lower Court increased the rate under the Federal Employees Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance (Amendment) Ordinance, 1980 enforce from 1st January, 1980. There is force in the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that since the question of granting monthly grant to the respondent arose much before the Amending Ordinance, 1980 was enforced, the respondent was not entitled to the rate enhanced by the said Ordinance. The said Ordinance was enforced from 1st January, 1980, so no retrospective effect was given to it. It benefits to the persons who became entitled to such a gran after the enforcement of the Amending Ordinance, 1980. The learner lower Court has wrongly given retrospective effect. No Court has jurisdiction to give retrospective effect. It can only interpret whether the Legislature intended to give retrospective effect to an enactment.
There is nothing in the Amending Ordinance to show that the intention of the Legislature was the Ordinance shall have retrospective effect. When expressly the Ordinance was enforced from a particular date, it is clear that it is prospective and not retrospective.
3. As a result, the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court, the rate of the grant is reduced to Rs, 100 p. m.