Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 3521 2026 SLG 3521 = 2026 SCP 195
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 5857 of 2024 [Against judgment dated 22.10.2024 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Camp Office, Peshawar, passed in appeal No.456(P)CS /2021]
Presented By: Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb
Mr. Umer Aslam Khan, Additional Attorney-General for Pakistan. a/w Farooq Zaman, Assistant, PAF.

Additional Director Civilian Personnel, Air Headquarters Peshawar and others. … Petitioners

VERSUS

Muzafar Masih. … Respondent

Law: Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973

Section:

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 212(3)

Summary The petitioner (employer) challenges the Federal Service Tribunal’s 22.10.2024 judgment that set aside a dismissal order against the respondent (a PAF employee). The Supreme Court allowed the petition, holding the departmental inquiry complied with the Efficiency & Discipline Rules (1973), the respondent’s confession and unchallenged witness testimony provided “some evidence” to sustain misconduct findings, and the Tribunal erred by reappraising evidence; the dismissal (30.08.2021) and departmental appellate order (14.10.2021) are restored. Key points  Respondent appointed 28.08.2016, regularized 27.09.2017; accused of immoral conduct and improper associations while serving at PAF Camp Badaber. Charge-sheet served 22.06.2020 under the Government Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973; inquiry ordered after unsatisfactory reply. Inquiry conducted by a committee; respondent informed of rights, participated, gave a signed voluntary confession on 04.08.2020, and declined to cross-examine departmental witnesses. Inquiry found allegations proved; competent authority imposed major penalty (dismissal) on 30.08.2021; departmental appeal dismissed 14.10.2021. Federal Service Tribunal accepted the respondent’s appeal on 22.10.2024, citing vagueness, incidents partly before regularization, and lack of documentary proof. Supreme Court held the Tribunal exceeded jurisdiction by reassessing evidence, found inquiry fair and findings supported by: unrebutted oral testimony, respondent’s confession/admissions, and surrounding circumstances. Court ruled absence of documentary evidence not fatal for this type of misconduct, restored the dismissal order and set aside the Tribunal judgment. Law and section No. Law / Instrument Relevant Provision / Rule Purpose / What it governs 1 Government Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973 Charge-sheet, inquiry, rights of accused, show-cause, penalty Provides the procedure for departmental disciplinary proceedings and imposition of penalties 2 Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 Article 212(3) Petition for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court from…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register