ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed dozens of appeals filed by the employees of Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd (PTCL), seeking benefit of Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS).
A three-member Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Tariq Parvez and Justice Ghulam Rabbani, announced the judgment which had, earlier, been reserved. The employees had applied for the benefit of VSS but were denied on the ground that they did not possess the requisite qualifying length of service.
Under VSS, apart from other benefits, an employee was also entitled to receive early retirement benefits if he had rendered a minimum of 20 years of service. The PTCL’s stance was that the employees were appointed on December 14, 1981, and March 24, 1983, and had passed their recruitment examination on August 3, 1987, and completed their training on October 30, 1988, and April 2, 1990, respectively, therefore, their service could only be considered from the date of successful completion of training and not from the date of their initial appointment.
In rebuttal, the employees referred to the case of one Mrs Rubina Khadim, a telephone operator, who was granted similar benefits on the basis of date of her appointment and not with reference to the date of completion of training. They submitted that the act of the PTCL was a clear case of discrimination, which warranted interference by the high court in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction.
Entertaining a letter of the employees as a petition, a division bench of the Sindh High Court had directed the PTCL to extend the benefit of VSS to the employees. Another division bench of the same high court on March 16, 2010, directed the PTCL to pay them the balance amount and monthly pension as claimed by them. Besides, various benches of the other high courts also passed similar orders.
The PTCL then moved the Supreme Court against the high courts orders, whereas the employees also filed pleas against the PTCL for not implementing the high courts order. The Supreme Court set aside all the orders of the high courts and dismissed the appeals of the employees.
The court in its judgment also held that all the employees having entered into contract of service on various conditions had no vested right to seek regularization of their employment, which was discretion of the employer.
