| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1988 SLG 181 1988 SLD 181 1988 SCMR 691 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Civil Appeal No.348-K of 1986, decision dated: 10-08-1987
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, CHIEF, JUSTICESHAFIUR RAHMAN, JUSTICEZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, JUSTICESAAD SAOOD, JAN, JUSTICEALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, JUSTICE
Muhammad Ali Sayeed, Advocate Supreme Court and A.Aziz Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Imam Ali Qazi, District Attorney-General and Muzaffar Hassan Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Respondent No. 3 . Ex parte
Civil Appeal No.348-K of 1986, decision dated: 10-08-1987
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, CHIEF, JUSTICESHAFIUR RAHMAN, JUSTICEZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, JUSTICESAAD SAOOD, JAN, JUSTICEALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, JUSTICE
Muhammad Ali Sayeed, Advocate Supreme Court and A.Aziz Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Imam Ali Qazi, District Attorney-General and Muzaffar Hassan Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Respondent No. 3 . Ex parte
M.A. RAHMANVSFEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 193
(a) Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973--R.3(a)--Customs Act (IV of 1969), S.193--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212--Leave to appeal granted to consider that (i) whether any error made in exercise of judicial or quasi-judicial power, without being tainted with dishonesty, can expose the functionary to disciplinary proceedings as to the manner in which the said power was exercised, and (ii) whether even on the assumption that the order suffered from errors which showed inefficiency on the part of the civil servant, such a solitary instance of inefficiency could be deemed to be sufficient proof of ground of inefficiency as contemplated by R.3(a) of Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973. (b) Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973-- ---Rr.2(4) & 3--Customs Act (IV of 1969), 5.193--Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964--"Misconduct"-- Definition-- Misconduct-Penalty in disciplinary proceedings for misconduct and inefficiency-Inefficiency and misconduct are two separate and independent grounds for penalty to be imposed in disciplinary proceedings on an accused civil servant.-- [Words and phrases]. Inefficiency and misconduct are two separate and independent grounds for penalty to be imposed in disciplinary proceedings on an accused officer. In the present case the charge against the appellant was of misconduct. The exhaustive part of the definition defines "misconduct" to mean (i) conduct prejudicial to good order or service discipline or (ii) contrary to the Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964, or (iii) unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman. The extended meaning of the term includes the bringing of influence on the Government etc. in regard to specified matters in relation to a Government servant. (c) Customs Act (IV of 1969)-- --S.193--Power vesting in the appellate authority under 5.193 is quasi-judicial in nature. (d) Customs Act (IV of 1969)-- --S.223--Scheme of S.223--Adjudication proceedings under the Act empowering the appropriate Customs Officer to impose penalties or pass orders of confiscation of goods, exercise appellate power and revisional jurisdiction against orders…
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