| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 999 2018 SLD 999 2018 PLC 475 |
Peshawar High Court
W.P. No. 110-B of 2016, decision & hearing Dated: 12-07-2017.
IJAZ ANWAR, JUSTICE, SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Muhammad Iqbal Khan Kundi for
Respondents.
W.P. No. 110-B of 2016, decision & hearing Dated: 12-07-2017.
IJAZ ANWAR, JUSTICE, SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Muhammad Iqbal Khan Kundi for
Respondents.
YAR MOHAMMAD KHAN
VS
PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH PRESIDENT AND 8 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Civil service--- ----Misconduct---Compulsory retirement---Delegation of powers---Authority and authorized officer---Scope---Petitioner-employee was served with a charge-sheet by General Manager of Telecommunication Company---Suspension order was communicated by the same officer---De novo inquiry was again authorized by the said officer---Final show-cause notice was also served by the General Manager---Order of removal from service issued was served by the said officer and order of acceptance of departmental appeal conveyed to the employee was again served through the same officer---Validity---Nothing was on record that departmental proceedings/penalty was approved by the Authority---Whole proceedings in the present case were initiated and authorized by Manager Discipline and never authorized by the competent authority---Even if there was any delegation of powers then Executive Vice-President (HR) being himself as delegatee could not further delegate his powers to the Manager Discipline Management---Where through a law or notification powers were delegated to an authority and that law or notification had not given any power to the authority for further delegation of said power then any such further delegation would not vest the delegatee such powers---Department had violated the concept of authority and authorized officer---Where the department itself constituted and notified the authority then all the departmental actions should have been initiated under the order of Authority---Order of penalty also required the approval of the Authority---Proceedings initiated against the employee and concluded having not been authorized by the Authority, had no legal status and were declared illegal and without lawful authority by the High Court---Impugned order of compulsory retirement was set aside and department was allowed to initiate fresh departmental inquiry, if so advised---Employee was directed to be reinstated and his back benefit's any should be decided after the out-come of such inquiry---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly. Saleemullah Khan Ranazai and Anwarul Haq for Petitioner. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: IJAZ ANWAR, JUSTICE:---.--- Through the…
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