Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 2025 2007 SLD 2025 2007 PLC 696
Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No.787(K)CE of 2000, decision dated: 17-04-2006.
QAZI MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI AND RASHID ALI MIRZA, MEMBERS

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

ABDUL KARIM

VS

PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION and others ABDUL KARIM vs PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION and others

Law:

Section:

Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Employees (Service and Discipline) Regulations, 1985-------Regln. 75(1)---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4---Dismissal from service---Appeal---Appellant working as Security Guard, was dismissed from service after issuing him show-cause notice and holding inquiry on allegation that during loading of baggage, vigilance staff recovered three golden bangles from possession of loader and that appellant who was present at The recovery of said golden bangles, had connived and abetted in said theft---Entire case against appellant depended upon confessional statement of co-accused/loader, which statement had no value in the eyes of law---Order of dismissal from service was issued to appellant, despite he was acquitted of the charge against him---Three co-accused who were also acquitted with appellant, were allowed to remain in service, while disciplinary action had been taken against appellant by dismissing him from service, though his case at the most fell within the purview of negligence---Main culprit was loader---Whether appellant had any hand in the theft or whether he had knowledge that loader had in his possession bangles in question, needed to be proved by evidence, but no evidence was available to that effect, except the hearsay evidence and confession of accused loader before the police or vigilance team---Appellant could not be connected to said confession of loader as said confession could only be used against accused loader---Record had shown that Employer Corporation had adopted different methods for different officials in one and the same case---Counsel for employer could not satisfy the Service Tribunal on the point of discrimination meted out to the appellant---Double standard and discriminatory treatment on the part of Corporation, itself was sufficient to vitiate whole proceedings---Impugned order of dismissal from service passed against appellant was not only illegal, but had been passed in a discriminatory manner---Said order was set aside with direction to the Corporation to reinstate appellant in service with full back benefits for the period appellant remained out of job. 1993 SCMR 603; 2003 PLC…
🔒
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