1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgments dated 18-2-2002 and 26-2-2002 whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, allowed the F.A.Os filed by the respondents in the time already laid down in F.A.O. No,384 of 2001 decided, on 14-1-2002.
2. ' The facts briefly narrated are that the petitioner Institution issued demand notices under section 23(1) of the Social Security Ordinance, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance), for increased demand, in respect of Special Allowance paid to the employees. Such notices were challenged by different employers before the Lahore High Court and thereafter the matter was set at rest through a judgment reported as Shamss Textile Mills and others versus Province of Punjab and two others (1999 SCM R 1477). Subsequent to the above judgment the impugned notices were issued for the increased demand by the petitioner Institution to certain employers. M/s. Ghazi Fabrics Limited filed F.A.O. No,384 of 2001 took exception to the aforesaid demand being discriminatory as the said increase was not demanded from the employers who approached the Lahore High Court as well as this Court M/s. Ghazi Fabrics Limited succeeded and the F.A.O. No,384 of 2001 was accepted through an order dated 14-1-2002.
3. ' The petitioner department challenged the said judgment through Civil Petition No,905/L of 2002 along with many other civil petitions before this Court, which were dismissed by a learned Bench of this Court vide its order dated 4-2-2003.
4. ' Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has failed to persuade us to take a different view as the criteria put by him does not suit the Institution that the increased demand is made from those employers only who have not approached the Courts. This act on the part of the petitioners is certainly violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. No, illegality has been committed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in giving the same treatment to the respondent employers as has been meted out to others employers placed in similar circumstances.
5. ' Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petitions being devoid of any merit are hereby dismissed and .