Principle of parity

In Azad Kashmir pay and other privileges of civil servants are determined on the basis of parity with Punjab — The principle of parity is not only confined to the extent of civil servants — But it was followed for other offices as well — The learned Judges of the High Court are entitled to the same pay and privileges as their counterparts in Punjab — All Secretaries to Government, Joint Secretaries, Deputy Secretaries and other officers/officials are enjoying the pay and privileges on the basis of principle of parity with Punjab. Azad Government & 2 others v. Syed Tayyab Gilani & 14 others 2009 SCR 415 (A)
Parity with Punjab in service matters. Held: The principle of parity with the Punjab is since long followed in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Azad Govt. v. Raja M. Nasab Khan 2011 SCR 257 (A)
Parity with Punjab — no more enforceable in Azad Jammu and Kashmir — The principle of parity with Punjab is no more enforceable according to principle of law laid down by this court. Azad Govt. & 3 others v. M. Younas Abbasi & 12 others 2016 SCR 887 (E) 2016 SCR 206, rel.
Grant of terms and condition as equal to Judge High Court — under notification dated 25-6-2002 — strict compliance of same — direction to Govt. — the practice of granting the terms and conditions equal to that of Judge High Court is not strictly according to the spirit of the Constitution. Such practice has been so misused that even a person who according to nature of his job is not performing any judicial functions is also getting the judicial allowance. It is very funny and mockery with the constitutional provisions. As the Government has already realized this situation and a notification which was issued on 25.6.2002 is holding the field, the validity of which has not been challenged by the respondent rather it appears to be consistent with the spirit of the Constitution, therefore, in this situation, no detailed deliberation is required. The Government and other concerned are directed to strictly and practically apply the notification dated 25.6.2002 and in future any violation of this notification will be deemed the violation of law and the Supreme Court’s direction Azad Govt. & 4 others v. Sardar M. Mukhtar Khan 2016 SCR 206 (K)
Parity with Punjab — no more in field — Govt. Notification No. FD/R/ 2004, dated 20^th May, 2004 — the phraseology of the notification clearly speaks that principle of parity with Punjab is no more having the force of law rather whenever there are anomalies or the laws made on the subject are silent in the matters enumerated in the notification, the concern may seek guidance. Azad Govt. & 4 others v. Sardar M. Mukhtar Khan 2016 SCR 206 (L)
Notification No. Admin-69/278, dated 16-1-1969 — Notification No. Admin/12903-53/70, dated 29-7-1970 — are of infancy era of the State — section 51, AJK Interim Constitution Act, 1974 — legislative development — notifications subject to section 51. Azad Govt. & 4 others v. Sardar M. Mukhtar Khan 2016 SCR 206 (L)
Notification dated 16-1-1969 and Notification dated 29.7.1970 — read with section 51 AJK Interim Constitution Act, 1974 — notifications subject to repeal or amendments — The referred notifications dated 16.1.1969 and 29.7.1970 were conditionally protected on the enforcement of Act, 1974 which clearly speaks that such laws will remain continued until altered, repealed or amended by the Act of an appropriate authority. Thus, the intention of the Constitution makers is clear that all the laws enforced before framing of the Constitution Act, 1974 shall remain operative till proper legislation by the proper forum is made so that the vacuum may not be created and to avoid anomalies and hardships. However, the operation of such law was also conditional subject to provision of Act. 1974. The provision of section 51 of Act, 1974 clearly speaks that such laws shall continue until altered, repealed or amended by the Act of appropriate authority. Azad Govt. & 4 others v. Sardar M. Mukhtar Khan 2016 SCR 206 (M)
As in the case in hand, the legislature has passed the Ombudsman Act, thus, by operation of the provision of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1974, the Acts made by the Assembly shall prevail and the other laws and notifications such like as parity with Punjab will have to cease their effect. Azad Govt. & 4 others v. Sardar M. Mukhtar Khan 2016 SCR 206 (N)
—parity with Punjab—no more having the force of law—in view of the provision of section 51 of the Interim Constitution Act, 1974, as well as notification dated 20.05.2004, the principle of parity with Punjab is no more having the force of law, thus the argument regarding the parity with Punjab is not available to the appellants. Muhammad Rizwan-ullah Khan & others vs Azad Government & others 2018 SCR 1161 (C)
—parity with Punjab—Special Allowance—50% of Ph.D. Allowance to employees having degree of MSc(Hons)—parity with Punjab no more existed—Contention that in view of the parity with Punjab the appellants are entitled to receive the M. Phil allowance as in different departments in Punjab the same is being given to the employees having the equivalent degree. Held: the principle of parity with Punjab is no more having the force of law. No terms and conditions of the service of the appellant have been infringed and they do not fall within the definition of an aggrieved person. Argument repelled. Muhammad Rizwan-ullah & 2 others v. Azad Govt. & 5 others 2020 SCR 245 (D)
—The principle of parity with the Punjab is no more holding the field— High Court fell in error of law while granting relief on the basis of parity with Punjab. AJ&K Government & 3 others Versus Muhammad Ishaq & 19 others 2021 SCR 23 (G) 2016 SCR 206 rel.
—Office of Advocate-General—terms & conditions of—the Government has domain to determine the terms and conditions and pay and privileges of any post or office keeping in view the nature of job etc— the parity may be also adjudged keeping in view the comparative quantum of responsibilities and assignments. AJ&K Government & 3 others Versus Muhammad Ishaq & 19 others 2021 SCR 23 (I)