| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 1418 1998 SLD 1418 1998 SCMR 779 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.458 of 1994, decision dated: 12-01-1998
SAIDUZZHMAN SIDDIQUI, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN AND MAMOON KAZI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No.458 of 1994, decision dated: 12-01-1998
SAIDUZZHMAN SIDDIQUI, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN AND MAMOON KAZI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
KARAMAT HUSSAIN
VS
WATER and POWER MEMBER (POWER), WAPDA and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978--R. 2.5---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether Service Tribunal, while maintaining penalty of employee, had not applied its mind to factual aspect of case; whether report of Inquiry Officer, that witnesses appearing against employee were independent witnesses was not correct: and whether there was no direct evidence of receiving bribe from contractors and there was no allegation that employee was reported to be corrupt. (b) Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules,1978--- ----R.2.5---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212---Employee's grievance against non-furnishing of preliminary inquiry report or statements of witnesses---Such grievance could have been raised before Service Tribunal but no such objection was taken before Service Tribunal or in grounds of appeal--Employee's allegation was that persons where evidence was recorded by Inquiry Officer were not the independent witnesses---No objection having been raised by employee before Service Tribunal, such evidence was rightly relied upon by Service Tribunal---Charge levelled against employee clearly indicated that he was proceeded against upon direct evidence of corruption, therefore, Authority did not rightly charge him with allegation of having reputation of being corrupt---Employee was charged with misconduct which includes corruption--Alleged corruption formed basis for disciplinary action against employee---No ground was made out to interfere with order of Service Tribunal which had maintained penalty of reversion imposed upon employee by Departmental Authority. Muhammad Umar Malik v. Federal Service Tribunal PLD 1987 SC 166; Muhammad Ibrahim Khan v. Secretary, Ministry of Labour 1984 SCMR 1014 and WAPDA, Lahore v. Manzoor Ahmad Arif 1994 SCMR 1042 ref. (c) Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978--- ----R. 2---Words "misconduct" and "includes" as used in R. 2---Meaning elaborately discussed. Zainul Abidin, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masood Akhtar,…
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