JUDGMENTMUNAWAR AHMED MIRZA, CJ.- Petitioner is a Government Officer in Education Department and presently posted at Dalabandin. It is asserted that employees in tribal areas are exempted from payment of Income Tax, as Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 has not been extended to Provincially Administered Tribal Areas. Following relief has been claimed in the petition: "9. "It is therefore, accordingly respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to declare: i.That the petitioner and other employees working in Dalabandin, a declared Tribal area are exempted from payment of Income Tax per notification Annexure "A", and ii.That the Memorandum dated 7.5.1994 Annexure "E" issued by respondent No.2 in-pursuance of letter of respondent No.1 Annexure "D" on the purported advice of respondent No.4 as contained in Annexure "C" is illegal, discriminatory without lawful authority and of no legal effect. iii. Directing the respondent No.2 to withdraw the Memorandum dated 7.5.1994: iv. Such other relief that may be deemed appropriate be also granted alongwith costs.
Learned Advocate General and learned Deputy Attorney General, have appeared pursuant upon pre-admission notice issued by the Court.
2. Mr. Amanullah Kunrani Advocate strenuously urged that the provisions of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 have not been extended to tribal areas, therefore, deductions from the salaries of Government employees serving or belonging to tribal areas can not be made. To substantiate the plea, reference has been made to S.R.O. 659.(1)/81. Regarding maintainability of petition, learned counsel placed reliance on the observations made by Honourable Supreme .Court in judgment reported as 1992 S.C.M.R. 250 and judgment of this Court in 1990M.(1).D. 1960.
3. . Learned Deputy Attorney General referring to section 12 of Income Tax Ordinance, urged that every employee of the Federal or Provincial Government, or Local Authority within Pakistan irrespective of his place of service was liable to pay Income Tax.
4. Learned Advocate General also supported the above assertion and emphatically added that S.R.0.659.(1)/81 relied upon by petitioner itself suggests application of Income Tax Ordinance in the tribal areas.
5. We have carefully examined the above contentions and perused relevant law.
6. Main grievance agitated in the petition relates to income tax deductions from salaries etc of the Government employees, who being residents of tribal areas are working there. Section 12(1) Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 regulates recovery of Income Tax chargeable from salaried persons, which however is reproduced below for ready reference:- '"12 (1) Income which would be chargeable under the head "Salary" shall be deemed to accrue or arise in Pakistan, wherever paid, if it is earned in Pakistan, or if it is paid by, or on behalf of, the Government or a local authority in Pakistan to a person in the service of such government or .
Authority, as the case may be" .7. Perusal of above provision manifestly discloses that every Government employee, receiving salary from Federal Government, Provincial Government or any local authority of Pakistan is bound to pay income tax at prescribed rate irrespective of his status of residence, place of posting or nature of work. The question about applicability of Income Tax Ordinance 1979 in the tribal areas has absolutely no relevancy because, income tax deductions are based upon entitlement of persons for receiving salaries from State exchequer. Therefore, We are inclined to respectfully observe that reference to above quoted judgment or bar under Article 247 of the Constitution while considering liability of Government Employees regarding payment of Income Tax has no nexus with the proposition under consideration. We therefore, feel no difficulty in concluding that once Government Employee is receiving his salary for State exchequer, heautomatically becomes liable to pay tax on his income, without any barear of locality, place of service or nature of duties unless specially exempted.
8. Notification No.SRO 659(1)/81 providing limited exemption to contractors regarding execution of contract work in Tribal areas relied upon by the petitioner instead of advancing his case, dearly negates the daim put forth by him.
9. For the above reason, we do not find any substance in the petition which is consequently dismissed in limine.