Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 1199 2025 SLD 1199 = 2025 SCMR 708
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.P.L.A. No. 3062 of 2022, decided on 25th February, 2025. (Against the judgment dated 30.05.2022 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in W.P. No. 1806 of 2013). Date of hearing: 25th February, 2025.
PRESENT: SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH AND AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JJ
Haseeb Shakoor Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Haroon Irshad, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD NASIR ISMAIL ---PETITIONER

VS

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS DIVISION, LAHORE AND OTHERS ---RESPONDENTS

Law: Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006

Section: 5,13(5)(ii)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 10A

(a) Constitution of Pakistan-------Art. 10A---Civil service---Disciplinary proceedings---Due process---Affected civil servants must be granted a fair hearing, and disciplinary proceedings must adhere to legal requirements---Due process ensures that no officer is unjustly penalized without being given an opportunity to present their defense---Courts must exercise judicial restraint and avoid undue interference with executive discretion---Judicial review is necessary to prevent abuse of power---Courts must respect autonomy of Executive branch in managing its employees---Judicial intervention should be limited to cases involving clear illegality, arbitrariness, or mala fide intent---Courts must balance individual rights with the larger public interest.(b) Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)-------Ss. 5 & 13(5)(ii), second proviso---Disciplinary proceedings---Major penalty, imposing of---Absence without leave---Principle of proportionality---Applicability---Punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed upon civil servant who remained absent from service for 48 days, without leave---Validity---Authority of competent authority in imposing any of the three major penalties is not restricted under second proviso to section 13(5)(ii) of Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006, even where period of absence from duty is less than one year---Where competent authority elects to impose a major penalty in cases of absence from duty for less than a year, it must do so in accordance with the principle of proportionality---Civil servant remained absent from duty for a total of 48 days and imposition of major penalty of compulsory retirement failed to meet test of proportionality---Neither the punishment established rational nexus between misconduct and severity of penalty nor it considered less restrictive alternatives---Supreme Court set aside judgment passed by High Court to the extent of the penalty imposed---Supreme Court directed that reinstatement of civil servant would be subject to a fresh determination by competent authority---Supreme Court directed competent authority to revisit case of civil…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register