| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 818 1998 SLD 818 1998 SCMR 2029 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.215 of 1995, decision dated: 20-05-1998 (On appeal from the judgment dated 13-6-1994 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No.53(L)/93-245(R)/93)
AJMAL MIAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, AND RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, JJ
Anwar Kamai, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Sh. Anwarul Haq, Deputy Attorney-General for
Respondent No. 1. Mrs. Anwar Raza, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2
Civil Appeal No.215 of 1995, decision dated: 20-05-1998 (On appeal from the judgment dated 13-6-1994 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No.53(L)/93-245(R)/93)
AJMAL MIAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, AND RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, JJ
Anwar Kamai, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Sh. Anwarul Haq, Deputy Attorney-General for
Respondent No. 1. Mrs. Anwar Raza, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2
Syed JAVAID IQBAL BUKHARI
VS
GOVERNMENT.OF PAKISTAN and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964--R.10---Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, R.2(4)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)---S.R.O. No. 618(1)/79 dated 5-7-1979---S.R.O. No.1011 (1)/85 dated 20-10-1985---Misconduct--Removal from service---Civil servant, as Secretary, Provincial Government in the Cooperative Department, had got granted huge loans to himself, his relatives and his associates using his influence as Secretary to Government---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider whether the loan advanced to a firm owned by brother-in-law of the civil servant, did not constitute misconduct in terms of R.10, Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964 read with R.2(4) of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discpline) Rules, 1973, whether Chief Secretary of the Provincial Government was authorised Officer of the Government servants in B.P.S-17, B.P.S.-20 and whether the entire enquiry proceedings initiated by the Chief Secretary against the accused civil servant and order of his removal from service passed on the basis thereof stood vitiated being illegal and void ab initio. (b) Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964--- ----R.10---Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, R.2(4)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212---Appeal to Supreme Court--Misconduct---Removal from service---Question as to whether a particular officer had been competently appointed as Authorised Officer and question as to whether an Enquiry Officer or an Enquiry Committee had been competently constituted are question of fact which could be agitated at the earliest opportunity so that if there was any defect in such appointments, the same could be cured---Question as to whether a Court, Tribunal or Authority had the jurisdiction was a question of law which could be raised at any stage if the dictates of justice so demanded. There is a marked distinction between want of authority of an officer to act as Authorised Officer and want of jurisdiction on the part of a Court, Tribunal or Authority exercising judicial or quasi judicial powers. A question, as to whether a particular officer has been competently…
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