Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 2362 2020 SLD 2362 2020 PLC 1263
Supreme Court of Pakistan
CIVIL APPEAL No. 158-L OF 2011, DECIDED ON 30TH JUNE, 2020, Date of hearing: 30th June, 2020. (On appeal from the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore Dated 27.05.2020, passed in Appeal No. 668(L)C.S/2001)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Mian Muhammad Javaid, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ibrar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz A. Shaukat, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

MIRZA AAMER HASSAN

VS

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

Law: Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, (XVII of 2000)

Section: 3(1)(e)(III)

Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000)--- ----S. 3(1)(e)(iii)---Fundamental Rules, R. 29---Major penalty of reduction/reversion to the lowest of the time-scale---Whether such penalty could be imposed without any specified time---Held, that major penalty of reduction/reversion to the lowest of the time-scale had to be time bound---Once the time was served the officer under penalty could revert to his original position or status in service. Section 3(1)(e)(iii) of the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 (the Ordinance) did not specify any time as to how long the reduction to the lowest post or time scale or lower stage in time scale was to last. However Rule 29 of the Fundamental Rules clearly provided that any such major penalty had to be time-bound. Consistent practice of the Supreme Court over the years was to specify the time in such like penalties by placing reliance on Fundamental Rule 29. Muhammad Sadiq v. Superintendent of Police and others 2008 SCMR 1296; Member (A.C.E. and S.T.) Federal Board of Revenue, Islamabad and others v. Muhammad Ashraf and 3 others 2008 SCMR 1165; Secretary Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas Division, Islamabad v. Saeed Akhtar and another PLD 2008 SC 392; Government of Pakistan through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and others v. Muhammad Umer Morio 2005 SCMR 436 and Tanvir Ahmed v. Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Lahore 2004 SCMR 647 ref. Major penalty of reduction to a lower post or pay scale or to a lower stage in a pay scale was not akin to the board game of Snakes and Ladders, relegating a civil servant to a lower position and making him rise up again. It was not the scheme of the penalty under the Ordinance that the officer after such reduction was to a start all over again in the new position and rise up the ranks as if to re-live his service life again. This was not the purpose or the object of the major penalty. Such like penalties, by nature were time-bound, they were to punish an officer for the lapse committed and once the time was served, the officer under penalty could revert to his original position or status in service and stood restituted. A major…
🔒
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