1994 PLP 683 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus F.IA. and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1994 PLP 683 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Fazal Ilahi Khan and Manzoor Hussain Sial, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAMZAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus F.IA. and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 683 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 683 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Fazal Ilahi Khan and Manzoor Hussain Sial, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 683 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD RAMZAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus F.IA. and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th November, 1993.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 29‑5‑1993, in Appeal No. 448‑R/1992). ‑‑‑‑R. 4‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Removal from service on charge of misconduct for absence from duty without leave‑‑‑Civil servant pleading illness but not leading evidence before Inquiry Officer in proof of his illness nor explaining as to why he did not get himself treated by a Medical Officer of his department‑‑‑Civil servant was‑ a temporary employee and he failed to explain his absence from duty for a considerable period‑‑‑Order of removal from service passed by Departmental Authority was rightly affirmed in appeal by Service Tribunal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J: ‑‑Muhammad Ramzan, an employee (BPS‑1) in the FIA Academy, Islamabad, seeks leave to appeal against judgment dated 29‑5‑1993, of the Federal Service Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal"), Islamabad, whereby his appeal directed against order dated 13‑2‑1992, passed by the departmental authority removing him from service was dismissed.
2. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had absented himself from duty on 7‑8‑1991, without permission and failed to attend the office until he was served with a charge‑sheet on 19‑11‑1991. The inquiry officer found him guilty of the charge as he failed to lead evidence in defence and particularly did not produce the doctor who had issued him medical certificates in proof of his illness. On the basis of the finding of the inquiry officer the competent authority removed him from service. His appeal before the Tribunal failed. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. It was contended by the petitioner that he could not attend the office on account of having fallen ill and referred to the copies of the medical certificates placed on the record in support of his submission.
4. We have heard the petitioner and have gone through the documents on the file. The petitioner did not lead evidence before the inquiry officer in proof of his illness nor could give reply to the question as to why he did not get himself treated by a medical officer employed by the FIA Academy. The petitioner was a temporary employee and has failed to explain his absence from duty for a considerable period. The impugned order passed by the departmental authority removing him from service was rightly affirmed in appeal by the Tribunal.
5. In the result, we find no substance in this petition and dismiss it. Leave to appeal is accordingly refused. AA./M‑1895/S. Leave refused.