Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2685 2021 SLD 2685 2021 SCMR 144
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 681 of 2020, decision dated: 26th November, 2020, hearing date: 26th November, 2020. (Against the judgment dated 30.12.2019, passed by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in C.P. No. 869 of 2016)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE
Kaleemullah Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (via video link from Quetta). Kamran Murtaza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent (via video link from Quetta).

NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN AND ANOTHER

VS

ZAHOOR AHMED MENGAL

Law: Revised Leave Rules, 1980

Section: 9(3)

(a) Civil service--- ----Employee of National Bank of Pakistan (‘the bank’)---Absence from duty---Termination of employment---Employee had remained absent from 31-10-2014 to 7-4-2016 except for one day i.e. 2-2-2016, when he stated to have reported for duty---Employee was issued three absence notices by the Bank at various times to join duty but he failed to do so, rather took a plea that on account of a tribal feud and threats to his life he was unable to work in the Bank---Employee did not provide any material or evidence showing that in fact there was any tribal feud or there was a threat to his life and even no instance in such regard whatsoever was pointed out by him---Not even an FIR of any incident showing threat to the life of the employee was provided to the Bank---In the face of admitted absence from duty, there was no need to hold a regular enquiry in the present case---Service of employee had rightfully been terminated---Appeal was allowed. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Division, Islamabad v. Mamoon Ahmed Malik 2020 SCMR 1154 ref. (b) Civil service--- ----Employee admittedly absent from duty---Disciplinary proceedings---Regular inquiry---Scope---Where the fact of absence from duty was admitted, there was no need for holding of a regular enquiry for that there was no disputed fact involved to be enquired into. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Division, Islamabad v. Mamoon Ahmed Malik 2020 SCMR 1154 ref. (c) Revised Leave Rules, 1980--- ----R. 9(3)---Extraordinary leave without pay (‘EOL’)---Scope---Unauthorised absence from duty---While imposing penalty on the employee in the case of unauthorized absence, the absence period treated as an EOL was not a punishment, rather it was a treatment given to the absence period, which the employer was entitled to do. National Accountability Bureau through Chairman v. Muhammad Shafique 2020 SCMR 425 and Kafyat Ullah Khan v. Inspector General of Police, Islamabad and another Civil Appeal No.1661 of 2019 ref. ORDER GULZAR AHMED, CHIEF JUSTICE:---.--- We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have also gone through the…
🔒
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