1990 PLP 1456 (SCMR)
NAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, GUJRANWALA
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1456 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, GUJRANWALA |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1456 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1456 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1456 (SCMR) (NAZIR AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, GUJRANWALA). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Ikramul Haq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 6‑1‑1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 318/170 of 1985). ‑‑‑‑S. 4‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Compulsory retirement‑‑ Leave to appeal‑‑‑Sufficient material was available before Authority for taking action against petitioner‑‑‑Tribunal rightly dismissed appeal of petitioner‑‑‑No question of law arising in petition for leave to appeal, same was refused.
Judgment & Decree
(From the judgment dated 6‑1‑1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 318/170 of 1985). ‑‑‑‑S. 4‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Compulsory retirement‑‑ Leave to appeal‑‑‑Sufficient material was available before Authority for taking action against petitioner‑‑‑Tribunal rightly dismissed appeal of petitioner‑‑‑No question of law arising in petition for leave to appeal, same was refused. Ch. Ikramul Haq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1988. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑The petitioner was a forest guard and was at the relevant time serving in Gujranwala Forest Division. On account of unauthorised absence for two periods falling between 29‑9‑1983 and 2‑10‑1983 and 7‑11‑1988 and 15‑1‑1989, departmental proceedings were taken against him and he was dismissed from service. He filed an appeal before the Conservator of Forest who on account of his long service converted the order of dismissal into one of compulsory retirement. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the Service Trib4nal. It was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for .the petitioner we find that there was sufficient material before the departmental authority for taking the action which it did in this case. No question of law for the decision of this Court arises in this petition. Leave is refused. H.B.T./N‑174/S Leave refused.