Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4220 = 2026 SLD 4220 = 2026 PLC 889
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.202526 of 2018, heard on 13th April, 2026.
Presented By: Anwaar Hussain, J
  Mian Umar Farooq for Petitioner.        Saad Bin Ghazi, Assistant Advocate General along with Sardar Naeem Akbar Khan for
Respondent No.2.        Usman Nasir Awan and Rahil Riaz for Applicant (in C.M. No.1 of 2026).

GHULAM SARWAR

VERSUS

DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER GUJRANWALA and others

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

Section: 3, 4(b)(vi), 13(6)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan

Section: 13, 199

(a) Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006) Ss. 3, 4(b)(vi) & 13(6)---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 13 & 199---Disciplinary proceedings---Manipulation of parentage and procurement of bogus identity---Termination from service---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Laches---Effect---Petitioner-employee was terminated from service on the allegation that he had obtained employment on the basis of false parentage and a bogus Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC)---Contradictions in official record surfaced during inquiry---Appeal and proceedings before Service Tribunal failed; the latter proceedings were withdrawn after prolonged pendency, followed by dismissal of a second departmental appeal---Present constitutional petition was filed after availing multiple unsuccessful remedies, challenging termination on the grounds of double jeopardy, mala fide inquiry and violation of due process---Pivotal question requiring determination before the High Court was whether the constitutional petition against termination was maintainable where the petitioner had approached multiple forums, withdrawn proceedings and invoked writ jurisdiction after delay, particularly in the presence of disputed identity and laches?---Held: It was not denied that the inquiry was initiated on an application filed by the grandson of deceased PM and the petitioner-employee had not only committed cheating while procuring government service, but had also, through such fraudulent act, aimed at claiming inheritance in respect of property left by deceased PM ---Petitioner had also instituted a suit challenging the action of the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) regarding cancellation of his CNIC showing PM as his father, which suit had been dismissed---It was an admitted position that his parentage was recorded as SM in the matriculation certificate and original CNIC---The fact that the petitioner himself submitted an affidavit of his purported mother stating that he was the son of PM and had been adopted by SM clearly showed that he was afforded adequate opportunity during inquiry proceedings to explain his position; thus, plea…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register