Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2816 1989 SLD 2816 1989 PLC 851
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 73 of 1982, decided on 28th .lay, 1981).
MUHAMMAD MEHMUD ASLAM PIRZADA, CHAIRMAN AND MALIK ABDUL AZIZ, MEMBER
Muhammad Ghani for Appellant. A.G. Humayun, District Attorney for
Respondents.

SHAUKAT KHAN

VS

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, AUQAF DEPARTMENT and another

Law:

Section:

Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975-- ---Rr. 4, 5 & 6--Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4--Dismissal from service without following prescribed procedure--Effect--Civil servant having been dismissed without following prescribed procedure, his dismissal was not sustainable being unlawful and against the provisions of Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975--Order of dismissal was thus set aside by Service Tribunal and case was remanded to competent Authority to proceed afresh, against civil servant strictly in accordance with the prescribed procedure. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD MEHMUD ASLAM PIRZADA (CHAIRMAN)---Shaukat Khan has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab services tribunals act, 1974 in which he has impleaded secretary to Government of the Punjab, Auqaf Department, Lahore and Director, Nizamat-i-Salat Cell, Auqaf Department, Lahore, as respondents. 2. Through this appeal the appellant has prayed that the impugned order dated 25-9-1986 passed by respondent No. 2 be set aside and appellant be reinstated in service. 3. Brief facts of the case are that in the first instance the appellant was appointed temporarily as Naib Qasid in BS-1 against a leave vacancy for a period of four months in the office of respondent No. 2 vide his order dated 1-7-1985. The appointment of appellant was regularised against an existing vacancy w.e.f. 29-10-1985 vide order dated 29-10-1985. Since the appellant knew driving, he was attached as Driver with respondent No. 2. On 18-9-1986 respondent No. 2 directed the appellant to bring certain books from Ulema Academy to his residence which he did. tie was again directed to go to the office by official vehicle and bring certain other papers from there. The appellant stated that he was not in a position to drive the official vehicle and go again during the curfew hours. Due to this misconduct the appellant was proceeded against by respondent No. 2 and on 9-10-1986 the appellant was delivered by registered post order date 25-9-1986 dismissing him from service w.e.f. 18-9-1986 due to that misconduct. The appellant can :0 10-1936 1mufer;c.d a departmental appeal during…
🔒
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