| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 538 1998 SLD 538 = 1998 SCMR 91 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 147 and 416-L of1997, decision dated: 26-06-1997
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, CJ AND RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J
Tariq Mahmood, Deputy Attorney-General with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 147 of 1997)Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent (in Civil Appeal No. 147 of
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 147 and 416-L of1997, decision dated: 26-06-1997
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, CJ AND RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J
Tariq Mahmood, Deputy Attorney-General with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 147 of 1997)Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent (in Civil Appeal No. 147 of
Civil s for Leave to Appeal Nos. 147 and 416-L of 1997, decided on 26th June, 1997FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and anothersvsSheikh ABDUL AZIZ
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
Removal from Service (Special Provisions) Regulation [(M.L.R. 58 of 1969)]---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Maxim: "Audi alteram partem"---Dismissal from service---Civil servant's name was included in the list of those civil servants who were required to be removed from service without affording opportunity of hearing to them---Authorities had already made up their mind to dismiss civil servant alongwith others from service---Such plea of civil servant was not, at all, contested by Authorities---Civil servant was, thus, condemned unheard which was against the spirit of natural justice contained in maxim "audi alteram partem"---Impugned order of dismissal was thus, mala fide, coram non judice and without jurisdiction on the face of it---High Court was right in holding that civil servant was dismissed from service with pre�determined mind and also without giving him opportunity of hearing--�Command issued by concerned Authority to Special Tribunal to dismiss civil servants mentioned Yin said list without providing them adequate opportunity of hearing, was thus mockery of civilized judicial system---Order of dismissal was, therefore, not sustainable in law on any ground whatsoever---Judgment of High Court whereby order of dismissal of civil servant was declared to be mala fide, coram non judice and without jurisdiction was maintained by Supreme Court--�Petition for leave to appeal was also barred by 32 days for which no satisfactory explanation had been given for condonation of delay---Leave to appeal was refused on merits as also being barred by limitation.Islamic Republic of Pakistan v. S.A. Rizvi 1992 SCMR 1309 rel.S.A. Rizvi v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1991 MLD 1834; Muhammad Sadiq v. Anwer Majeed 1989 P.Cr.LJ 1223; The State v. Muhammad Saleh and another PLD 1980 Kar. 131; Hussain Bakhsh v. Allah Bakhsh and others 1981 SCMR 410; Nazar v. The State 1968 SCMR 415; Jalal Khan v. Lakmir 1968 SCMR 1345; Muhammad Khan v. Sultan 1969 SCMR 82; Piran Ditta v. The State 1970 SCMR 282; Noor Muhammad v. The State 1972 SCMR 331; Settlement Authority through The Chief Settlement Commissioner, Lahore and another v. Mst. Akhtar Sultana PLD 1976 SC…