To,

                        The Secretary of Law Department,

                        Government of NWFP, Peshawar.

Subject:          Appeal for counting of Verified Service of Untrained Teacher for annual increments and Pension.­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

Respected Sir,

                                    I have the honour to invite your attention towards an ancient legal matter not solved even by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan to the satisfaction of the Teachers in light of the Constitution of Pakistan, Civil Servants Act, 1973 and the Fundamental and Supplementary Rules framed in 1922 by the British Government in India and still prevalent in Pakistan. The Supreme Court has done more injustice in October 2002, when a larger Bench of Judges was constituted just to override the previous judgments of the same Supreme Court in favour of the Teachers. The Government of NWFP was restless on the judgments of the previous judgments of the Supreme Court in favour of the Teachers and challenged the matter before the Supreme Court and was satisfied when the teachers were finally defeated through the Supreme Court in the absence of any Rule or Law but the teachers were not so powerful like the lawyers to raise a slogan against the judgment. The same Constitution and rules which were violated in the case of the Teachers but no one resisted but the violation in the case of the Judiciary itself created a lot of confusion in the Country"”Different parameters of justice.

            (1)        That the appellant was appointed as a teacher and he took over charge on 23-5-1988.

(2)        That the appellant was properly given salaries and allowances from 1988 as was admissible under the Rules until this time except the annual increments for the years December 88, December 89, December 90 and December 91.

(3)        That the perusal of the Service Book shows that the service of the appellant has been duly verified by the Departmental Officers but he was denied annual increments without showing any rule or law from the Fundamental or Supplementary Rules by which the Pay of the appellant is regulated. The Officers of the Education Department, Finance Department and Accountant General fully knew the concept of verification of the Service because they have never verified the Service of person remained on leave without pay or remained absent. In a Tribunal or a Court, an appeal or plaint is not accepted unless the contents are duly verified by the Oath Commissioner. Similarly, when a military dictator suspend or abrogate the Constitution his act remains unlawful unless the Parliament verify the unlawful acts of the dictator. Then how the verification of a Departmental Officer is not accepted in the case of a Teacher. Courts are there to interpret the laws but when the clear Rules are ignored then a person necessarily become prejudiced to the Judgments of the Superior Courts.

(4)        That under the Fundamental Rules when the service is verified then the Government Servant is entitled not only to the Pay and allowances but also to annual increments and Pension based on the length of the Service.

(5)        That according to the Civil Servants Act, 1973 the Pay of the Civil Servant shall be regulated by the Rules.

(6)        That the appellant has been deprived of annual increments at present while at the time of retirement, his service shall not be counted for the pension for which he has not been given annual increments and his verified service shall be deducted from the length of the service for the Pension. Injustice over injustice.

(6)        That the concerned departments like the Education Department, Finance Department and Accountant General have acted partly on Rules when the appellant was given Pay and Allowances and partly he was treated against Constitution, Civil Servants Act and the  Fundamental Rules when he was denied annual increments (and in future not counting service for the pension). The Supreme Court of Pakistan in October of the year 2002 also overlooked all the previous judgments in favour of the teachers and deprived all the teachers of their annual increments forever.

(7)        That the Constitution of Pakistan has provided, that every citizen shall treated according to the law.

(8)        That there is no Rule or  Law which prevent the concerned departments from giving annual increments to the Civil Servants whose services are verified by the officers themselves.

(9)        That the Supreme Court of Pakistan (1976 SCMR, 297) had clarified this matter of Untrained Teachers 32 years ago that "there is no rule for the distinction between the trained and untrained teachers in relation to Pay."  What occurred subsequently that they have been discriminated and deprived of their right which has guaranteed by the Constitution. Why the Constitution is not considered in their case? Whether new rules have been framed? (The appellant is not aware of any such rules to the contrary). The Supreme Court can only interpret the law and apply it to the cases and cannot make new rules for the parties during litigation for the adjudication of their rights. The Supreme Court can decide cases according to the rules or laws prevalent in the Country and cannot decide any case when the rules are not present. Judgments are given in light of the rules and laws available, not in their absence.

(10)      That in the presence of the Constitution and the Fundamental Rules, a teacher cannot be treated arbitrarily either by the Government Departments or the Supreme Court whose service is verified by the officers. For example, Fundamental Rule 23 authorizes a Government Servant to give option for the fixation of his Pay from a certain date. Similarly, under other Fundamental Rules, a Government servant cannot be given annual increments when he got extraordinary leave without Pay. In nut shell, every act either of the Government Department or of the Government Servant is regulated by the Rules. Admissibility or inadmissibility of any thing is controlled and regulated by the Rules and before deciding any thing, a particular rule or Rules are cited for the for the rights of the parties in the litigation and Judgment. It is totally an unjustifiable conduct of the concerned Departments that Pay and Allowances are given under the Rules while annual increments and Pension are denied without Rules. Whether annual increments and Pension are not regulated by the Rules?

(11)      That the appellant has been paid salaries and allowances but not annual increments and in future he shall not be paid full pension according to the length of the service as other teachers have been deprived in the past. It is similar to the person who acknowledges the ownership of another person of the movable or immovable property but is refusing to deliver the possession and benefits of the property to the real owner. It is also similar to a case when an accused is acquitted by the Court but does not order for the release of the acquitted person from jail.

(12)      That the appellant has the right to ask from the concerned departments that under which rules the Pay and allowances were paid and under which rules his annual increments were denied and in future less Pension would be given due to non-counting of the verified service for the calculation of the pension.

(13)      That the Courts are bound to follow the rules in their judgments while deciding cases whether it be the Service Tribunal or the Supreme Court. When there is no rule or law to the contrary then it is presumed that the untrained teachers are as much entitled to the annual increments as much the trained teachers. When the concerned Departments or the Supreme Court is of the view that the untrained teachers are not entitled to the annual increments or their service cannot be counted towards pension whic rule or law they put forward in support of their opinion or judgment? When the Legislature has not discriminated them then what Authority is Supreme from the Legislature which is warranting the deprivation of the teachers from their right which has been guaranteed by the Constitution. It is the bad luck of the people of our Country that they treated against the wishes of the Legislature and Laws. The judgments of the Supreme Court have always been controversial for both the Politicians and the Civil Servants while in favour of every Military dictator under the cloak of "doctrine of necessity". Neither the Provincial Assembly nor the Parliament has enacted any such law or rule which may give authority or force to deprive the untrained Teachers from their rights how the Supreme Court can give verdict against the teachers on a matter on which no rule is present for their distinction. Courts are bound to follow the rules not their personal likings and dislikings.

(14)      That on every ground the untrained teachers are entitled for the untrained service to be counted both for the annual increments as well as for the full Pension. The main reason of the persecution of the teachers is that this helpless class has never been properly represented in Courts or heard but their case was dealt as if they are not eligible to be treated according to neither the law nor Constitution. Those in this country who have power can do everything by dint their force and every institution become a sheep before them while those who are properly law-abiding and dutiful are ignored on either one pretext or another. The recent upheavals in both the lawyers and the militants are the main result of the lawlessness even in the Government Departments. Rules are there but they are not acted upon. Courts are there but no one feel satisfaction on the judgments. Each one is cheating the other and the worst sufferers are those who do not know anything about the affairs in the Country.

(15)      That the perpetual peace and stability is possible only in that case when each one is properly dealt with according to the law of the land and done full justice. Without justice, no development, no investment, no education and finally-------.

In the Province, being the head of the Law Department, you will have to show us that there is law and every one is dealt according to that law. You will have to protect the rights of the people according to the law and will have to show the people that Rule of Law is in letter and spirit. Heavy responsibility of the future of this Country rests on you. I am a law-abiding Civil Servant, therefore, I depend on the Constitution, Acts of the Parliament and Departmental Rules, otherwise those who have guns and missiles in their hands depend on them alone.

Prayer:

                        It is, therefore, that the matter may please be thoroughly discussed in light of the prevalent rules, (Not judgment of October 2002 of the Supreme Court), and then may please be forwarded to the Chief Minister for approval for awarding annual increments to all the eligible teachers.

Dated: Tuesday, 27 January 2009.

Thanks.

Yours Obediently,

Manzoor Ahmad

PST Government Primary School No. 3 Kotha, District Swabi.

Copies for the information and action to,

(1)               The Governor NWFP, Peshawar.

(2)               The Chief Minister, NWFP, Peshawar.

(3)               The Minister of Education, NWFP, Peshawar.

(4)               The Secretary of Education, NWFP, Peshawar.

(5)               The Director (Schools and Literacy), NWFP, Peshawar.

(6)               The Executive District Officer (S&L) District Swabi.

(7)               The Deputy District Officer, Primary Education, Tehsil Topi, District Swabi.

Manzoor Ahmad.