Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1080 2004 SLD 1080 2004 SCMR 1015
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 1283 of 2003, decision dated: 19-4-2004.(On appeal from judgment/order, dated 18-2-2003, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No. 2659 of 2002)
SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH AND KHALIL-UR-RAHMAN RAMDAY, JJ
Akhtar Masood Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ms. Afshan Ghazanfar, A.A.G. for
Respondent No. 1. Nadeem Aslam Ch. D.S. Home Department with Adil Rasheed Under Secretary for
Respondents Nos. 2 and 3

ABDUL JALIL

VS

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Chief Secretary, Punjab, Lahore and others

Law:

Section:

Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)----S. 12(1)---Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline). Rules, 1999, Rr. 3 & 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Art. 212(3)--¬Compulsory retirement from service---Charges of inefficiency, corruption and misconduct---Service Tribunal dismissed appeal of civil servant---Authority admitted to have reinstated some Officers by accepting their representations, but contended that had the civil servant waited for decision of his representation by competent authority, his case too would have been decided on merits---Authority did not object to acceptance of appeal of the Civil Servant by the Supreme Court--Supreme Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned and remanded case to competent authority with direction to decide pending representation/appeal of civil servant on merits. JUDGMENT SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.-----This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), dated 18-2-2003, passed in Appeal No. 2659 of 2002. 2. Pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings initiated under section 12(1) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, on the charges of inefficiency, corruption and misconduct, the competent authority retired the appellant in the public interest. After exhausting .the departmental remedies the appellant approached the learned Tribunal by filing appeal, which was dismissed vide impugned judgment herein. 3. Mr. Akhtar Masood Khan, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the appellant, inter alia, contended that the impugned judgment of the Tribunal is not sustainable because it is the result of misreading and non-reading of the evidence; that the appellant was discriminated by the Tribunal, inasmuch as identical appeals, bearing Nos.2849 to 2851 of 2002, were accepted by the Tribunal and the orders of compulsory retirement were set aside. He further pointed out that Show Cause Notices were issued to 30 D.S.Ps. in November, 2001 regarding their proposed retirement from service under section 12(i) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act of 1974, wherein allegations against all the D.S.Ps. were the same, as being…
🔒
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