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Pirzada, the counsel in several petitions, contended that the pay protection awarded to the petitioners had been withdrawn by the respondents in violation of the well-celebrated principles of the laws.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

Editorial

Updated 09 Aug, 2026

Makkah agreement

IN the midst of a gruelling war between the US and Iran — currently at a stalemate — the signing of the Makkah...
09 Aug, 2026

Conflicting priorities

THERE is a reasonable argument that the democratic process must go on regardless of prevailing conditions; that...
09 Aug, 2026

FIFA controversy

FIFA PRESIDENT Gianni Infantino is at the centre of a storm of his own making. Even after a crisis meeting in...
Updated 08 Aug, 2026

Danger ahead

PAKISTAN has already paid a heavy human price this monsoon, even as another dangerous spell approaches. NDMA figures...
08 Aug, 2026

Israeli impunity

ANY hope that Hamas’s decision to disarm would lead to a breakthrough has been dashed for one simple reason:...
Updated 08 Aug, 2026

Flawed investigations

An inaccurate record of a victim’s wounds hinders the dispensation of justice. Medical examiners in such a critical area cannot cut corners.