2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Talib H. Rizvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and C.M. Latif, Advocate-on-Record for petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- 2. Mr. Talib H. Rizvi, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of petitioner and urged with vehemence that the service of petitioner could not have been terminated on the basis of alleged forged and fake certificate as no benefit whatsoever was obtained on the basis of said certificate but the prescribed qualification for appointment of Constable was Middle and the authenticity and genuineness of Middle certificate was never disputed. It is also pointed out that the certificate in question was not filed by the petitioner nor utilized by the appointing authority and on this score alone the judgment impugned is liable to be set aside.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 7-11-2000 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in A. No.3079 of 1999).
R. 6
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Finding of fact, interference with
Civil servant at the time of joining service, produced and fake certificate showing that he had passed class 9
Disciplinary proceedings under Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, were initiated and he was dismissed from service
Service Tribunal partially allowed the appeal and dismissal from service was converted into removal from service
Plea raised by the civil servant was that the qualification required for the post was middle standard and he did not take any benefit from the certificate of class 9
Validity Factum of forgery and production of fake certificate for procuring employment being questions of fact had been determined by the department after having a thorough probe, which was upheld by Service Tribunal
Such finding of fact could not be reversed in absence of any plausible justification which was lacking in the case
Civil servant could not have been appointed without producing the disputed certificate
No other certificate regarding Middle class was either produced before the Service Tribunal or Supreme Court hence question of determination of its genuineness or authenticity did not arise
Matter involved was not of benefit simpliciter but the civil servant had expressed his bent of mind and conduct which could not be appreciated
No question of law of public importance being involved in the matter and the judgment of Service Tribunal being well-based, same did not. warrant any interference
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
JAVED IQBAL, J.
Pursuant to disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner under the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 on account of procuring employment of Police Constable on a forged, false and fake certificate showing that he had passed class 9th, major penalty of dismissal from service was imposed by means of order, dated 7-12-1995. After exhausting the departmental remedies the petitioner preferred an appeal which has partly been accepted and penalty of dismissal from service has been converted to that of removal from service.
2. Mr. Talib H. Rizvi, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of petitioner and urged with vehemence that the service of petitioner could not have been terminated on the basis of alleged forged and fake certificate as no benefit whatsoever was obtained on the basis of said certificate but the prescribed qualification for appointment of Constable was Middle and the authenticity and genuineness of Middle certificate was never disputed. It is also pointed out that the certificate in question was not filed by the petitioner nor utilized by the appointing authority and on this score alone the judgment impugned is liable to be set aside.
3. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of the petitioner in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. The factum of forgery and production of fake certificate for procuring employment being questions of fact have been determined by the department after having a thorough probe, findings whereof were upheld by the learned Service Tribunal which cannot be reserved in absence of any plausible justification which is lacking in this case. We are not persuaded to agree that no benefit had been obtained by the petitioner for the reasons that petitioner could not have been appointed without producing the said certificate. No certificate regarding middle class was either produced before the learned Service Tribunal or this Court, hence the question of determination of its genuineness or authenticity does not arise. Besides that it is not the question of benefit simpliciter but the petitioner has exposed his bent of mind and conduct which cannot be appreciated. No question of law of public importance is involved in the matter and the judgment impugned being well-based does not warrant any interference. The petition being devoid of merit is dismissed and leave refused. M.H./M-38/SC Petition dismissed.