Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 293 2015 SLD 293 2015 PLC 243
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 962 of 2012, decided on 9th April, 2014.(On appeal against order dated 28-5-2011 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No. 525(R) CS/2010)
NASIR-UL-MULK, SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Ch. Abdul Rab, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. M.D. Shehzad Feroz, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents. Ibrar Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents

QAISER ZAMAN

VS

FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE, ISLAMABAD and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil service--- ----Resignation from Government service, process of---Delay by concerned officials in approving resignation---Resignation of civil servant not processed by concerned officials for 2-1/2 years and instead issuing him a show notice for absence from duty, and consequently dismissing him from service---Legality---Income tax officer (appellant) applied for leave to pursue further studies---Competent authority did not sanction the leave---Appellant tendered his resignation from service on 31-3-2006, which remained unprocessed---On 13-11-2008 a show -cause notice was issued to the appellant on the ground of his absence from duty under the provisions of Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000---Appellant submitted his reply to the show-cause notice, but no response was received by him---On 17-1-2009 appellant received a notification entailing penalty of his dismissal from service---Departmental appeal filed by appellant against his dismissal from service was also dismissed as time barred---Federal Service Tribunal also dismissed appellant's appeal as being time barred---Plea of department that resignation of appellant could not be processed in time as his file had been misplaced---Validity---Concerned officials under the law/rules/regulations were responsible for expediting the process of resignation of civil servants well in time---Department could not justify issuance of show-cause notice to the appellant after inordinate delay of 2-1/2 years---After tendering his resignation case of appellant was not processed for 2-1/2 years on the ground that his personal file went missing---Department instead of processing the case of resignation of appellant opted to proceed against him departmentally for absence of duty---Was not understandable as to how the department could sit over the resignation once it was tendered---In case the personal file of the appellant went missing the head of the department should have ordered enquiry and should have proceeded against the delinquent officers found responsible for misplacing the personal file of the appellant---Supreme Court directed Secretaries, Establishment Division and Cabinet Division to…
🔒
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