| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2761 2024 SLD 2761 2024 SCMR 559 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 2007-L of 2023, C.M.A. No. 2782-L of 2023 in C.P. No.2007-L of 2023, C.P. No.2008-L of 2023 and C.M.A. No.4417-L of 2023 in C.P. No.2008-L of 2023, decided on 18th January, 2024. (Against judgment dated 30.03.2023, passed by the Lahor
Present: Amin-ud-Din Khan and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, JJ
Aftab Raheem, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Shoaib Tabish, Law Officer (via video link from Lahore) for Petitioner/ Applicants (in both cases). M. Irian Khan Ghaznavi, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 1 (in both cases).
Civil Petition No. 2007-L of 2023, C.M.A. No. 2782-L of 2023 in C.P. No.2007-L of 2023, C.P. No.2008-L of 2023 and C.M.A. No.4417-L of 2023 in C.P. No.2008-L of 2023, decided on 18th January, 2024. (Against judgment dated 30.03.2023, passed by the Lahor
Present: Amin-ud-Din Khan and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, JJ
Aftab Raheem, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Shoaib Tabish, Law Officer (via video link from Lahore) for Petitioner/ Applicants (in both cases). M. Irian Khan Ghaznavi, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 1 (in both cases).
The PUNJAB EMPLOYEES SOCIAL SECURITY INSTITUTION, LAHORE through Commissioner and others---Petitioner/Applicants
VS
JAVED IQBAL and others---Respondents
Law: Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006
Section: 4(1)(b)(vi)
Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)--- ----S. 4(1)(b)(vi)---Contractual employee of Punjab Employees Social Security Institution, Lahore (the PESSI)---Reinstatement in service from date of dismissal with all back benefits---With regard to the allegation levelled against the respondent (employee) regarding his poor performance from 06.11.2011 to 21.08.2020, the fate of the said allegation could only be decided after conducting a thorough probe/regular enquiry---Said allegation stood belied from the remarks recorded by the Reporting Officer in the Personal Evaluation Reports of the respondent from the years 2009 to 2020, wherein his performance had been shown as satisfactory---Conduct of the petitioners (departmental authorities) established mala fide on their part to dispense with the services of the respondent as all penal actions against the respondent were initiated by them after filing of writ petitions and contempt petitions/applications by the respondent---As regards the allegation against the respondent of not following duty timings properly, it was apparent from the record that without specifying days when the respondent did not attend the office on time supported the plea of the respondent that he performed his duties to the entire satisfaction of his superiors---Moreover, the Reporting Officer while recording the remarks in the column of "Punctuality" did not give any adverse remarks against the respondent---Last allegation in the show cause notice that despite previous enquiries initiated against the respondent his behaviour remained very irresponsible during his service, no incident or untoward situation during the service of the respondent had been pointed out or referred to by the petitioners---High Court rightly reinstated the respondent in service from the date of his dismissal with all back benefits, and gave directions to the departmental authorities to take up the matter regarding regularization of services of the respondent with the relevant authority and upon fulfilment of codal formalities to ensure decision within a period of six months positively---Petitions were dismissed and leave was refused.…
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