| Case ID |
0ffb04b5-07fc-4c7d-bbb7-038d19f8a2a9 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 581 of 2011 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 19, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
Sep 27, 2011 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that the voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme introduced by the State Bank of Pakistan was not coercive and that employees who opted for it could not later claim pensionary benefits. The Court noted that the scheme was voluntary, and the petitioners had accepted the terms of the scheme without objection for over six years. The Court emphasized that the scheme provided compensation equivalent to 50% commutation of gross pension as a full and final settlement for those with less than 25 years of service, and thus denied their claim for monthly pension payments. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment that directed the Bank to pay the petitioners their gross pension. This decision reinforces the legal principle that voluntary acceptance of a retirement scheme precludes subsequent claims for additional benefits under different statutes. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Civil Appeal No. 581 of 2011, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed the implications of the Voluntary Golden Handshake Scheme introduced by the State Bank of Pakistan. This case highlights the importance of understanding the legal ramifications of voluntary retirement schemes, particularly in relation to pension entitlements. The Court determined that employees who opted for the scheme were not entitled to claim pensionary benefits after accepting the scheme, which was designed to provide a financial exit for surplus employees. The decision underscores the necessity for employees to fully comprehend the terms of such schemes before acceptance, as well as the doctrine of laches which can bar claims if not pursued in a timely manner. This case serves as a critical reference point for future disputes concerning voluntary retirement and pension rights, emphasizing the need for clarity in employment contracts and retirement policies to avoid legal complications. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
High Court of Sindh,
State Bank of Pakistan
|
| Judges |
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.,
TARIQ PARVEZ,
GHULAM RABBANI
|
| Lawyers |
Khalid Anwar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants.,
Abdul Rahim Bhatti, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos. 1 - 132, 134 and 137 - 202.,
Sardar Asmatullah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.136.,
Atif Hayat, Respondent No.133 in person,
Ms. Anjum Naz, Respondent No.135 in person
|
| Petitioners |
IMTIAZ ALI KHAN and others
|
| Respondents |
STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN through Governor and another
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 1417,
2012 SCMR 280
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2006 SC 602,
State Bank of Pakistan v. Khyber Zaman and others 2004 PLC (CS) 1213,
Muhammad Idrees v. Agriculture Development Bank of Pakistan and others PLD 2007 SC 681,
State Bank of Pakistan v. Muhammad Aslam Khan (Civil Appeal No.976-1000 of 2009),
Muhammad Masihuzzaman v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1992 SC 825,
Muhammad Ahmed v. Government of Sindh 1999 SCMR 255,
Muhammad Anwar Siddiqui v. Lahore Development Authority 2009 SCMR 177,
S.A. Jamil v. Secretary to the Government of the Punjab 2005 SCMR 126,
Principal, Cadet College, Kohat v. Muhammad Shoab Qureshi PLD 1984 SC 170,
Zia Ghafoor Piracha v. Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education 2004 SCMR 35
|
| Laws Involved |
State Bank of Pakistan Staff Regulations, 1993,
State Bank of Pakistan Officers (Pension-cum-Gratuity) Regulations, 1980,
State Bank of Pakistan Act (XXXIII of 1956),
Constitution of Pakistan
|
| Sections |
Regln. 19,
Regs 2(i),
Regln. 4,
S. 54(1),
Arts. 185(3),
Arts. 199
|