Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2122 1989 SLD 2122 1989 PLC 323
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 181 (L) of 1983, decided on 21st January, 1989.
KH. ABDUL, JALIL AND CH. HASAN NAWAZ, MEMBERS

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUHAMMAD YAQUB MIR

VS

REVENUE OFFICER NO. 2, ELECTRICITY, WAPDA, GUJRANWALA and others

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978-- ---R. 5(v)(b)--Termination of services on charge of misconduct--Validity of-Plea of absence of second show-cause notice and failure of Authority to form a tentative opinion regarding imposition of penalty set up to assail order of termination--Record showed that after civil servant had submitted his explanation to show-cause notice, two notices were despatched calling upon him to appear for personal hearing on specified date failing which his services would be terminated--Another notice was despatched to such civil servant whereby he was again asked to appear before competent Authority within specified days, failing which his services would be terminated without service of any other notice under Efficiency and Discipline Rules--Final notice was a clear indication of tentative opinion formed by Authority that a penalty had to be imposed--Nature of that penalty had also been determined therein--Civil servant was thus given adequate opportunity under the Rules to defend himself against the proposed action and there was no miscarriage of justice. (b) West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978-- ---R. 11 (1)(2)(d)--Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S. 4--Termination of services--Departmental appeal preferred beyond period of limitation on the date on which appeal before Service Tribunal was preferred--Filing of departmental appeal against order of termination beyond period of limitation, on a date on which appeal before Service Tribunal was preferred was not a substantial compliance with the law requiring a departmental appeal before approaching Service Tribunal--Discretion vesting in Service Tribunal in determining whether delay m filing departmental appeal or appeal before Tribunal should be condoned would have to be exercised to promote ends of justice--Allegations of embezzlement and forgery constitute such a grave charge against civil servant that discretion vesting in Tribunal could not be exercised in his favour--Appeal being hopelessly time-barred and having been filed without complying with…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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