Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2197 1989 SLD 2197 1989 PLC 459
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Miscellaneous Petition No. 89 of 1988 in Appeal No. 151(L) of 1988, decided on 2nd April, 1989.
CH. HASAN NAWAZ AND, ABDUL, JALIL 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

MANZOOR AHMAD ARIF

VS

GENERAL MANAGER (OPERATION), WAPDA, LAHORE and another

Law:

Section:

Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973)- ---S. 4-- West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978, R. 11--Temporary injunction, grant of-­Reduction in rank--Employee had an arguable case m view of nature of allegations, report of Inquiry Officer and penalty imposed--Reduction in rank was sought as a punitive measure and not m consequence of any administrative consideration--Balance of convenience obviously was in allowing injunction, particularly when no disturbance would be caused in department's working--All the three ingredients necessary for grant of temporary injunction present in favour of petitioner viz. prima facie case, balance of convenience and likelihood of irreparable loss to be-caused to petitioner in case injunction was not allowed-­Employee succeeded in making out a substantial case--Injunction granted in circumstances. Malik Asghar Khan's case 1971 S C M R 569 rel. Syed Jamshed Ali for Appellant. Kh. Fahim Ejaz for Respondents.- Date of hearing: 30th March, 1989. JUDGMENT CH. HASAN NAWAZ (MEMBER),--The appellant's application for temporary injunction is outcome of his appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, instituted by him on 18-6-1988, to challenge the validity of order dated 15-10-1987 (Annex H), whereby, in consequence of disciplinary proceedings under the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1978, the Competent Authority "decided to impose upon him the penalty of reduction in rank for a period of three years" with a direction that he should not be given a field assignment. 2. The prayer for stay is based on the ground that he has got a good prima facie case; that the balance of convenience lies in allowing the continuance of prevailing situation and that refusal to grant the injunction would cause an irreparable injury to him. 3. The application has been opposed on the pleadings that there is no prima facie case in favour of the appellant and that balance of convenience lies in refusing the grant of injunction. It is, however, conceded that the impugned on; has not yet been enforced and that the appellant is still working as Deputy Director, in…
🔒
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