| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLG 416 1999 SLD 416 1999 SCMR 1873 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 1740-L of 1996, decision dated: 10-07-1998. (On appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-1996 passed by, the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No. 370(L) of 1995)
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN AND CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, JJ
Petitioner -in person. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.. Aslam Sindhu, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehd,i Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos.3, 4 and 5/Caveators
Civil Petition No. 1740-L of 1996, decision dated: 10-07-1998. (On appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-1996 passed by, the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No. 370(L) of 1995)
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN AND CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, JJ
Petitioner -in person. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.. Aslam Sindhu, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehd,i Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos.3, 4 and 5/Caveators
ALI NAWAZ
VS
PAKISTAN RAILWAY through Chairman/Secretary and others
Law:
Section:
Civil service--Reinstatement --- Entitlement to back benefits --- Civil servant was removed from service on charge of misconduct --- Service Tribunal, on appeal, found that charge had not been proved and ordered ' his reinstatement --- Back, benefits from date of removal from service up to date of reinstatement were, however, denied to civil servant---Validity --- No appeal against order of Service Tribunal reinstating civil servant had been filed by Authority and it was conceded that civil servant was not gainfully employed elsewhere during period of his removal from service --- Service Tribunal, in circumstances, was not right in denying back benefits. JUDGMENT IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 21-5-1996 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Appeal No.370-L of 1995. 2. The petitioner is a Railways employee. He was removed from service with effect from 13-7-1995 on the charges of misconduct. On appeal, the charges levelled against him were found not proved and consequently he was ,reinstated in service without payment of arrears for the period from the date he was removed to the date of his joining the department vide impugned judgment, dated-21st May, 1996. Admittedly, the petitioner was exonerated of the charges against him and not for technical reasons or by granting him benefit of insufficiency of evidence. It would be advantageous to reproduce paragraph 8 of the impugned judgment, which reads thus: -- "We have looked into all the aspects…
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