| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3119 = 1963 SLD 3119 = 1963 PLD 1 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 414 of 1962, decided on 17th October 1962.
Presented By: M. R. Kayani, C. J. and Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, J
Karam Elahi Chauhan for Petitioner. Zaheer Abbas for A.-G. for
Respondents. Date of hearing : 11th October 1962.
Writ Petition No. 414 of 1962, decided on 17th October 1962.
Presented By: M. R. Kayani, C. J. and Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, J
Karam Elahi Chauhan for Petitioner. Zaheer Abbas for A.-G. for
Respondents. Date of hearing : 11th October 1962.
HAMID-UD-DIN-Petitioner
VERSUS
THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Government servant----- ----Allegation, in show-cause notice, of "unsatisfactory service"-Removal order also mentioning grounds of "corruption" and "unbecoming conduct"-Held : Expression "unsatisfactory service" included grounds of "corruption" and "unbecoming conduct"Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Ordinance (III of 1959), Ss. 3 & 4-Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Rules, 1959, r. 2. (b) Government servant------ ----Removal, on finding of Screening Committee-Appeal to Appointing Authority from such finding- Opportunity of personal hearing not necessary-Omission to hear, no ground for interference in order of removal, under writ jurisdiction-Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Rules, 1959, rr. 6, 7- "Appeal" means only "petition of appeal"-Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Ordinance (III of 1959), S. 10-Bar against Courts' jurisdiction does not apply to writ jurisdiction of High Court expressly given by Laws (Continuance in Force) Order (Post-Pro clamation I of 1958), Art. 2 (4). An essential part of the procedure for the hearing of an appeal, as laid down in the cases of Sardar Ali and Mrs. Dina Sohrab Katrak, is that the appellant should be heard personally. In the present case, however, the provision in rule 7, Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Rules, 1959 is only that the appointing autho rity shoved consider "the finding the recommendation and the appeal, if any," and the word "appeal" can be understood to mean only the petition of appeal. It is not an appeal in the sense of an appeal from an order. The order has to be passed by the appointing authority. Held, therefore, that the requirement of a personal hearing in the present case was not necessary, and that the reasoning of Sardar Ali's case P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 25 and that of Mrs. Dina Sohrab Katrak P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 45 was not applicable Further, that the Public Conduct (Scrutiny) Ordinance, 1959 is part of the ordinary law, and cannot oust the jurisdiction which the Post-Proclamation Order I of 1958, conferred on the High Court in respect of the issue of writs by Art. 2 (4). …