2011 SCMR 1618 (PLP)
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KASUR and another — Petitioners Versus ZAHID ALI — Respondent
| Citation | 2011 SCMR 1618 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khilji Arif Hussain and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ |
| Parties | DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KASUR and another — Petitioners Versus ZAHID ALI — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Employees' Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 SCMR 1618 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Employees' Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 SCMR 1618 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khilji Arif Hussain and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 SCMR 1618 (PLP) (DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KASUR and another — Petitioners Versus ZAHID ALI — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ahmed Rauf, Additional Advocate-General for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 23rd June, 2011.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 19-7-2010 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore passed in Appeal No.725 of 2010).
Ss. 4 & 5
Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 212(3)-Recovery of Rs. 1,08,740 imposed as penalty
Dispensing with inquiry
Waiver of such penalty by Service Tribunal
Keeping in view nature of allegations, Authority had not conducted regular enquiry
Authority had not given any plausible reason for waiving off inquiry
Supreme Court set aside impugned judgment while observing that the Authority, if desired, could hold de novo inquiry against appellant within specified time. Respondent in Person.
Judgment & Decree
KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, J.-The petitioners, aggrieved by the order of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore whereby the appeal filed by the respondent was partly accepted, the orders dated 17-9-2009 and 2-2-2010 were modified to the extent that the penalty of recovery of Rs.108740 is waived off.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that no valid and cogent reasons have been given by the Tribunal for waiving off the penalty imposed by the competent authority. In reply to a query made by us, whether any departmental inquiry was conducted in the matter looking to the nature of allegations, to which, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that no regular inquiry was conducted and the inquiry was dispensed with. From perusal of the record it appears that while waiving off the inquiry, no plausible reason has been given by the petitioner.
3. In this view of the matter, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed, the impugned judgment as well as order dated 17-9-2009 and 2-2-2010 are set aside. However, if the department, so desire, can hold de novo inquiry against the respondent within the period of four months from the date of this order. S.A.K./D-7/SC Appeal accepted.