1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
WARIS KHAN Versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PESHAWAR and 2 others
| Citation | 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal N: W.F.P. |
| Bench Members | Malik Muhammad Parvez Khan, Chairman and Sang-e-Marjan Khan, Member |
| Parties | WARIS KHAN Versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PESHAWAR and 2 others |
| Primary Law | North-West Frontier Province Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: North-West Frontier Province Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal N: W.F.P. bench comprising: Malik Muhammad Parvez Khan, Chairman and Sang-e-Marjan Khan, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (WARIS KHAN Versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PESHAWAR and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Muhammad Anwar for Appellant.
- Muhammad Latif Khan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Rr. 5 & 6--North-West Frontier Province Service Tribunals Act (I of 1974), S.4--Civil servant charged with offence of accepting illegal gratification, but no regular enquiry to probe into his guilt was conducted--Effect--Authority on receipt of reply to show-cause notice announced civil servant's dismissal order Departmental appeal preferred by civil servant was rejected by the same officer who was accompanying the Authority at the time of alleged occurrence- Authority thus had not adhered to principles of natural justice--Civil Servants dismissal order from service was set aside and he, was reinstated in service.
Judgment & Decree
MALIK MUHAMMAD PARVEZ KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant Waris Khan was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 12-11-1987 of respondent No. 1 and his appeal to respondent No. 2 being dismissed, he has approached the Tribunal for setting aside the same on the grounds that he was in no way responsible for the receipt of illegal gratification, that no enquiry was conducted in the case and that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who were witnesses to the occurrence acted as the judges, in derogation of the principles of natural justice, equity and good conscience. No law on the earth provides such state of affairs to, act in the capacity of a prosecutor as well as a Judge. The appeal was denied by the respondent. We aye gone through the record with the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant and Special Government Pleader and have come to he conclusion that it would have been fair and impartial if the authority had appointed some Enquiry Officer to probe into the Quilt of the appellant It required definite proof of the allegations of the receipt of illegal gratification. On the other hand the learned authority on receipt of reply to the show-cause notice proceeded to announce the dismissal order. The appeal preferred by the appellant was rejected by the same officer who was accompanying the authority at the time of the alleged occurrence. We are, therefore, satisfied that the respondents 1 and 2 have not adhered to the principles of natural justice and by accepting the present appeal, we set aside the impugned orders. The appellant stands reinstated in service from the date his dismissal was announced. He is entitled to all the benefits. Parties are left to bear their own costs. File be consigned to the record room. A.A./124/Sr.N Appeal accepted.