Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 541 1996 SLD 541 1996 PLC 507
Service Tribunal (AJ&K)
Service Appeal No. 743 of 1994, decision dated: 1st October, 1995
RAJA BASHIR AHMAD KHAN, CHAIRMAN AND KHAWAJA ABDUL HAMID, MEMBER

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

Syed IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH

VS

AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 7 others Syed IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH Vs AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad a

Law:

Section:

Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1977- ----Rr. 6, 7 & 8---Dismissal from service---Civil servant appointed as Additional Secretary, was proceeded against on various charges and enquiry -was held against him---Authorised Officer on receiving report of Inquiry Officer recommended to Authority that civil servant be dismissed from service and Authority which was Prime Minister, accepted recommendations of Authorised Officer and dismissed civil servant from service and also ordered that amount involved in the case should also be recovered from the civil servant---Enquiry conducted against civil servant though was impartial, but was not conducted according to Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1977---Inquiry. Officer did not make a separate file for purpose of inquiry and papers, were found scattered here and there, irl file and were not placed in any proper order---No material was on record to show that inquiry was conducted from day to day and that adjournments given were reported to Authorised Officer according to rules---Statement of witness appeared on behalf of Authority was recorded after about seven days from recording statement of civil servant and no evidence was on record to show that civil servant was present at the time of recording evidence of that witness or that civil servant was provided opportunity to cross-examine that witness---Enquiry report clearly showed that facts considered by Enquiry Officer in his report were not brought- on file through witnesses or any other evidence oral or documentary but Enquiry Officer had based his opinion on facts either stated by civil servant or facts which were found in the record of Department---Rule 8 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1977 mandatorily provides that before imposing a major penalty on civil servant, Authority would afford accused/civil servant an opportunity of being heard in person, either before himself or before an officer senior in rank to civil servant designated for purpose, but no such opportunity was afforded by Authority to civil servant before awarding major penalty to him---Not only Enquiry Officer in the…
🔒
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