Suspended civil servants entitled to full salary: SC

Upholds FST verdict, cites Fundamental Rule 53

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court has held that a suspended civil servant is entitled to receive full salary and other service benefits during the period of suspension, declaring that suspension does not sever the employer-employee relationship nor extinguish contractual rights.

In a four-page judgement authored by Justice Shakeel Ahmad, upholding the Federal Service Tribunal (FST) decision in favour of a Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) employee, the SC said that "it is by now well settled that suspension is not removal, dismissal or termination from service".

Rather, it is an interim measure, which merely suspends the performance of duties while the order of appointment or contract continues to subsist, and the relationship of employer and employee remains intact, the ruling stated.

"Consequently, the civil servant continues to hold the post, albeit without performing duties. Once the contract of service continues to operate, all rights flowing therefrom, including entitlement to full salary, remain enforceable during the suspension period."

The employee had been serving as a senior clerk/inspector in the FBR. After completing more than 31 years of qualifying service, he applied for retirement on medical grounds. However, his application was not considered by the department. Subsequently, on the directions of the petitioner department, he appeared before a Medical Board for examination. The Board opined that he was suffering from multiple diseases and declared him unfit for further service.

Following an inquiry, he was compulsorily retired from service on July 12, 2024, with the observation that the period of his suspension be treated as extraordinary leave without pay, and that the pay and allowances paid to him during the period from 06.11.2023 till the imposition of a major penalty be recovered from him.

His departmental appeal remained unaddressed, prompting him to file an appeal before the FST, where the decision partly came in his favour.

The FBR subsequently challenged the FST order before the SC.

A division bench comprising Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan and Justice Shakeel Ahmad, while upholding the FST order, noted that suspension does not extinguish the contract; therefore, an employee cannot be deprived of lawful remuneration without express legal sanction.

The order observes that when the government issues an appointment order, it enters into a binding contract of service with the employee. Any unilateral withholding of salary, without the authority of law, is inconsistent with the terms and conditions of such appointment.

Depriving a suspended employee of full pay, salary and service benefits is not only unjust and oppressive, but also contrary to the express mandate of Fundamental Rule 53 (b)"

"In the case of a Government servant under suspension, other than that specified in clause (a), he shall be entitled to full amount of his salary and all other benefits and facilities provided to him under the contract of service, during the period of his suspension"

"Allah, the Almighty, commands justice and forbids oppression, as ordained in the Holy Quran

Similarly, the Holy Quran unequivocally prohibits the unlawful deprivation of property and lawful earnings, declaring that people should not devour one another's wealth and should not withhold from others that which is rightfully theirs. In the same vein, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) emphasised the sanctity of timely remuneration by commanding that the labourer be paid his wages before his sweat dries".

The judgment further notes that Islam mandates the fulfilment of contracts, protection of lawful earnings, and prohibition of exploitation and unjust deprivation. Suspension is merely an interim arrangement and does not amount to a finding of guilt. Imposition of financial deprivation before adjudication amounts to punishment without proof, which is repugnant to Islamic principles of justice.

"The verses of the Holy Quran and the Hadith quoted above clearly establish the obligation of timely and full payment of wages"

The court also noted that, while interpreting Rule 53 of the Fundamental Rules, the Shariat appellate bench of the SC had already held that, in light of the injunctions of Islam, a suspended government servant must be allowed full salary along with all other benefits and facilities provided to him under the contract of service.

The judgment held that the tribunal had rightly concluded that a suspended civil servant is entitled to full salary and other service benefits during the suspension period.