Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 1983 2013 SLD 1983 2013 PLC 1398
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.2385 of 2006(BWP), heard on 3rd June, 2013.
ATIR MAHMOOD, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ABDUL MAJEED SHEIKH

VS

ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LTD. and others ABDUL MAJEED SHEIKH vs ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LTD. and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil service-------Disciplinary proceedings---Removal from service---Corruption, charge of---Acquittal of civil servant from such charge by competent court---Effect---Civil servant due to such acquittal would be deemed not to have committed charged offence---Competent authority in such case would be bound to reinstate civil servant in service forthwith and could not deprive him of his lawful right to be reinstated in service. Superintending Engineer GEPCO, Sialkot v. Muhammad Yousaf 2007 SCMR 537 rel. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan, employee of---Removal from service---Corruption, charge of---Pendency of criminal proceedings against petitioner on basis of such charge in Anti Corruption Court---Report of Inquiry Officer found petitioner to be innocent while suggesting to competent Authority to wait for final decision of the Court---Imposition of penalty of removal from service by competent authority without issuing show cause notice to petitioner---Plea of Bank was that petitioner could not be reinstated for having reached age of superannuation---Validity---Competent authority had neither adhered to recommendations of Inquiry Officer nor issued show cause notice to petitioner, but had condmned him unheard---Competent Authority was obliged to wait for decision of the court and act thereupon---Said court had acquitted petitioner from the charge, thus, he would be deemd to be not to have committed such offence and was liable to be reinstated in service forthwith---Petitioner though was not entitled to be reinstated due to attaining age of superannuation, but same would not deprive him of monetary benefits to which he was entitled under law---High Court set aside impugned order while observing that petitioner would be deemed to be in service from date of removal from service till date of attaining age of superannuain and entitled to all benefits. Dr. Muhammad Islam v. Government of N.-W.F.P. through Secretary, Food, Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperative Department, Peshawar and 2 others 1998 SCMR 1993; Superintending Engineer GEPCO, Sialkot v. Muhammad Yousaf 2007 SCMR 537;…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492