LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has set aside the recovery of salaries and other benefits with retrospective effect from over 200 lecturers working in different education institutions.

Justice Sajid Mahmood Sethi passed the order allowing the petitions filed by Amna Mubarik and others.

The petitioner challenged the actions of the provincial government regarding reduction or reassessment of their pay retrospectively and the recovery of the past salaries as well.

Advocate Safdar Shaheen Pirzada, the counsel in several petitions, contended that the pay protection awarded to the petitioners had been withdrawn by the respondents in violation of the well-celebrated principles of the laws.

He argued that the substantive rights of the petitioners cannot be affected retrospectively.

He cited a judgement, saying the financial benefits accrued and already received by the employees in pursuance of an illegal order passed by the competent authority, cannot be recovered from them.

On the other hand, Assistant Advocate General Saad bin Ghazi defended the impugned actions, saying the issue involved in the petitions regarding fixation of basic pay of contract employees at the time of their regularisation had been settled by the Supreme Court.

Even otherwise, he said, petitioners were civil servants and their petitions were not maintainable.

However, the law officer could not rebut the stance of the petitioners that pursuant to a 2016 judgement, the relief of pay protection was being granted to other similar employees, but same was being denied only to the extent of two districts.

In his verdict, Justice Sethi observed that to claim such a right as has been granted to similarly placed other persons, is the fundamental right of petitioners and the Constitution extends protection to their right.

The judge allowed the petitions and set aside the impugned actions being illegal and without any lawful authority.

The judge remitted the matter to the Punjab chief secretary with a direction to decide the same afresh keeping in view the court’s observations preferably within a period of 30 days.

Published in Dawn, March 7th, 2025