' ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.---This application moved under Order XXXIII, Rules 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, seeks appropriate further orders to give due and proper effect to the judgment and order dated 25-6-1995 rendered in Civil Petitions Nos. 578 to 580, 593 and 594 of 1995
2. Facts forming the background of this application, briefly stated, are that in the year, 1972 privately managed schools were nationalized in pursuance of the provisions of Martial Law Regulation No, 118 while District Council Schools were Provincialized. In 1975, management and control of the schools run/administered by Municipal Committees/Corporations was also taken over by the Provincial Government. Resultantly, two cadres viz. Nationalized and Provincialized cadres of school teachers came into existence. It appears that with a view to resolve the controversy regarding the service conditions of the teachers of these cadres the Chief Minister issued the following directions contained in Letter bearing No, SO (Coned-S)1-104/88, dated 10-10-1991:--
(a) The demand of the school teachers of the Provincialized/Nationalized Cadres for promotion to the next higher scale/award of selection grade with immediate effect has been accepted in principle on the ground that the school teachers of general change of 1970 to 1979 have since been promoted/awarded Selection Grades.
(b)..
(c).
(e)
(f)
(g) The benefits of equal chances of promotion/selection grades shall be available to all categories of teachers of the Nationalized/Provincialized Cadres as soon as their counter-parts with the same length of service in the General Cadre are promoted/awarded Selection Grades.
' It also appears that the manner in which the orders of the Chief Minister were implemented did not satisfy the teachers/respondents who, therefore, preferred Appeals Nos. 251 to 254 of 1992 and 648 of 1991 before the Punjab Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal after referring to the aforementioned letter dated 10-10-1991 and Notification dated 27-8-1975 observed as follows:-- "It becomes quite clear that the appellants could utilize their previous service for counting length of service vis-a-vis their counter-parts in the General Cadre for claiming comparable benefits e.g. Selection grade. Moreover, even promotions. But all this will happen in their exclusive provincialized cadre. The intent was not to allow them merger with the General Cadre. Conversely, the provision was that their own provincialized cadre was in fact a dying cadre which of course in due process would become extinct. The proposition envisaged by this letter was that they would not be allowed to get into the General Cadre or claim some right over them. On the other hand it visualizes that these cadres would go hand in hand in their own respective, water tight channels without measuring them together. However, if an Officer of the General Cadre gets certain monetary benefits after rendering certain length of service, correspondingly the appellants will also be entitled to claim the same benefits providing they have rendered as much service which of course will be computed after including the service they rendered before their institutions were provincialized."
' The appeals of the respondents were accordingly allowed by the Service Tribunal by its judgment dated 27-2-1995 with the following observations: ' The appellants shall have a right to count previous service for the purposes of seniority among themselves and of course to compute their length of service to claim monetary benefits which are permitted to the Officers of the General Cadre after completion of certain length of service."
3. The aforementioned order of the Service Tribunal dated 27-2-1995 was assailed by the Provincial Government before this Court in C.Ps. No,578 to 580-L of 1995 and Civil Petitions Nos. 593 and 594-L of 1995. It appears that the learned counsel appearing for the Provincial Government did not contest the view of the Service Tribunal that the respondents/teachers shall have a right to count previous service for the purposes of seniority among themselves. It was, however, contended that the respondents were entitled to count their service for the purpose of claiming monetary benefits available to all the officers of the General Cadre only with effect from 1-7-1975 when the management of the schools was taken over by the Provincial Government and not from an earlier date. This contention was not accepted by this Court holding that "It is to be noticed that the respondents possessed the same academic qualifications as were prescribed for the teachers of the General Cadre and the duties which they performed before nationalization were precisely of the same nature and responsibility (sic) belonged to General Cadre. There is, therefore, no reason why their services prior to 1-7-1975 be ignored when computing their lengths of service with the teachers of the General Cadre for the purpose of granting them benefits received by the latter." It was further observed that no limitation of the nature as was canvassed by the counsel for the Provincial Government could be spelt from the order of the Chief Minister referred to above.
Petitions for leave to appeal were accordingly dismissed vide order dated 25-6-1995.
4. Petitioners which are Associations of the Nationalized/Provincialized School Teachers and Headmasters have now filed this Miscellaneous Application seeking further orders to give due and proper effect to the earlier judgment of this Court dated 25-6-1995. Grievance made in this application is that the Government had issued a Notification on 17-11996 extending the benefit of the judgment of this Court to the Provincialized as also to the Nationalized cadre of the School Teachers but in this Notification, "an unauthorized restriction was imposed to the effect that computation of service rendered by the Provincialised/Nationalised cadre would be available only for seniority and other benefits" viz. Promotion/selection grade in their respective cadre as are being enjoyed by their counterparts with the same length of service in the General Cadre." Precise complaint of the petitioners is that their members are being denied the benefit of pension and it is stated that a number of teachers have already retired whose pension is being calculated on the basis that they have rendered less than 25 years of service which is contrary to the judgment of this Court. Contention of the petitioners is that in terms of this Court's judgment dated 25-6-1995, each member of the petitioner Associations" is entitled to count period of pre-nationalised service towards pension as well".
5. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition relying upon P.O. No, 6 of 1983 which enlarged the scope of the guarantee contained in para. 7(2) of M.L.R. 118 of 1972 by providing that "they shall be entitled to compute the length of service to claim monetary benefits which are allowed to Officers of the General Cadre after completion of certain length of service", submitted that the total length of service is to be computed not only for the purposes of seniority and other benefits viz. Promotion/selection grade but also for the purpose of pension.
6. During the course of hearing, our attention has been invited to the minutes of the meeting held on 11-12-1996 under the Chairmanship of Additional Chief Secretary to consider the demands of the College/School teachers of the Nationalised/Provincialised/M'.C. Cadres arising out of the judgment of this Court. In para. 2 of the Minutes, it is recorded with reference to the demand/objection raised by the teachers that the phrase "seniority and other benefits" is inclusive of the pensionary benefits that this objection was considered and it was decided that since the benefit of pension would involve huge financial implication as their service prior to the date of Provincialisation/Nationalisation is to be computed for the purpose of pension, the Education Department should, therefore, take up the matter in regard to admissibility of pension with the Finance Department.
7. The Officers of the Education and Finance Department who are present in the Court state that the matter is still under consideration. That being so, we do not feel inclined to interfere so as to examine the request of the petitioners in any depth at this stage. This application is accordingly disposed of leaving it to the concerned Departments to take final decision in the matter as early as possible preferably within four months from the date of this order. We hope that when deciding the matter, the authorities shall keep in view the judgment of this Court dated 25-6-1995 as also of the Service Tribunal and the observations made therein.