' This is a case involving persecution of the heirs of a deceased employee of Health Department of Government of the Punjab who had been working as a "Dai" in a Rural Health Centre. It is complained that after the death of Mst. Anwari Begum her soul is not being allowed to rest at peace because her heirs are being pressurised to forego her gratuity/salary for the period that she admittedly served beyond the age of superannuation and was correspondingly paid salary in lieu of the duties performed by her.
2. Unfortunate background of the case is that in Rural Health Centre, Shahr Sultan District Muzaffargarh, there was only one post of Dai which was occupied by Mst. Anwari Begum. She died on 7th August, 1986 and her death was reported on 12th August, 1986.
3. It is a common ground between both the sides that there was only one vacancy of Dai and the Rural Health Centre could not have functioned without the services of a Dai. However, what is being objected to by the hypertechnical people in this case is that why did the poor lady, who was made to serve under the orders of the department, continue to work and draw her salary for about two years after her age of superannuation which she reached on 25-1-1984.
4. I really wonder if a rustic woman belonging to the category of low paid staff could be burdened with the knowledge of date of birth or the date of her superannuation. It was indeed, the responsibility of the supervisory officers of the department themselves, as in the case of higher officers, to issue a notification or order of retirement of an employee which formal legal step was not taken at the appropriate stage. The department continued to make her work and she obediently continued to perform her duties and functions without demur. In such a situation, it is difficult to take the view that the deceased employee Mst. Anwari Begum was in any manner to blame and could be dubbed as having received overpayment. The question of an illegal payment would only arise if through some clever device an empolyee was to be found to have obtained monetary benefits without correspondingly performing the assigned duties. It is not denied that if the deceased had been made to retire on 25-11-1984 the Health Centre could not have run without a Dai.
5. It would be pertinent to refer to the reply filed by respondent No, 2, District Accounts Officer. In para. 2 of the reply it has been observed that "Mst. Anwari Begum Dai of District Health Office, Muzaffargarh, was to retire from service on 25-11-1984 on attaining the age of superannuation but the Department/Office concerned did not retire her on 25-11-1984 and she was allowed to continue in service beyond superannuation." This finding/admission of the factual aspect is conclusive and binding qua the respondents. It renders Mst. Anwari Begum free from all blame in the relevant respect. The Departmental view, therefore, merely proceeds on non-objective and biased approach to save the officers by making a poor employee's heirs a scapegoat It would, therefore, be unfair and unjust to burden the deceased employee with consequences of acts of omission and commission of her officers and resultantly deduction of Rs,18,889.63 out of total dues payable to her including her gratuity and pension. In such a situation, normally I would have been inclined to order that the deduction, if any, on this account, if at all, should have been made from the officers responsible. On no coneivable principle the proverbial shylock's pound of flesh could be claimed from the heirs of a deceased low paid employee without any legal justification.
6. The Departmental authorities may, if need be, move for formal sanction for regularisation from the competent authority in the light of facts found above because in such like cases ex post facto sanctions had been obtained and granted in a number of cases. It is never the intention of law that it be applied in a wanton or oppressive manner. There is a presumption of legislature being benign and this concept must be given the fullest effect.
7. Learned Additional Advocate-General, Mr. Tassadduq Hussain Jillani, at this stage submits that the officers who were at the helm of affairs in the year 1986 may well have retired and it will not be fair to trace them out and burden them with unnecessary penalties because there is no element of mala fides to be found in this case. I am inclined to agree with the Law Officer's submission but when taken to its logical end, it would equally apply to the deceased employee and constitute her complete defence against deduction being made.
8. The result is that this writ petition is accepted and the impugned action of making deduction out of the gratuity/pension amount of Mst. Anwari Begum, deceased employee, is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. A direction is also issued to the respondents to move the competent authority for having the technical requirement fulfilled, if necessary keeping in view the hardship and peculiar circumstances of the present case. It is really a pity that the heirs of the deceased employee have been made to wait so long for the payment of the dues which have been withheld without any legal justification on one-sided view of the matter. I have no manner of doubt that the competent authority, as a God-fearing person would adhere to law by coming to the aid of the heirs of the deceased low paid employee and this process, on being adopted, would be finalised within three months of receipt of the copy of this judgment.
' In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall, however, be no order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.