2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
KHAIR MUHAMMAD Versus CHAIRMAN, NADRA and 2 others
| Citation | 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Nazar Muhammad Shaikh and Abdul Rashid Baloch, Members |
| Parties | KHAIR MUHAMMAD Versus CHAIRMAN, NADRA and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
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 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Nazar Muhammad Shaikh and Abdul Rashid Baloch, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (KHAIR MUHAMMAD Versus CHAIRMAN, NADRA and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sanaullah Noor Ghauri for Appellant.
- Asif Mangi for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 25th February, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
Rr. 3(c) & 4(1)(b)(ii)
Civil Servants Act (LXXI of 1973), S.13
Compulsory retirement from service
Civil servant was proceeded under Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 on the charge of demanding illegal gratification from a person, and he was retired under provisions of S.13 of Civil Servants Act, 1973
No proceedings having taken place under S.13 of Civil Servants Act, 1973, order passed against civil servant had become null and void and same was set aside by Service Tribunal and civil servant was reinstated in service
Authorities were directed to conduct de novo proceedings within specified time against civil servant under relevant law affording him full opportunity to defend himself
Question of back benefits was to be decided upon the result of de novo proceedings. 2003 PLC 600 and 2003 SCMR 1720=2003 PLC (C.S.) 1303 ref.
Judgment & Decree
NAZAR MUHAMMAD SHAIKH (MEMBER).
Appellant has filed this appeal against respondent No.2's order dated 27-12-2001 whereby appellant has been retired under section 13(1)(1) of Civil Servants Act, 1973 as amended vide Civil Servants (Amendment) Ordinance, 2000. Departmental appeal filed by the appellant has not been responded despite lapse of prescribed statutory period.
2. The facts of the case indicate that the appellant at the time of retirement had rendered about sixteen (16) years service and had never been awarded any major or minor punishment during his career. The proceedings against the appellant started with the issuance of Show-cause notice dated 29-5-2001 which was issued under Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules of 1973 containing the following allegations:-- "That on 17-5-2001 you demanded Rs.500 from Muhammad Saleem Akhtar Mughal son of Muhammad Tufail resident of R-303 Railway Society, 2 Gulistan-e-Johar B-I-I 6/A Karachi for submitting verification report of N.I.C. bearing Citizen Code No.520-40-130855 in the Court of IInd Judicial Magistrate Malir Karachi and got Rs.200 through Mr. Aijaz Ali Jaffery, Naib Qasid, DRO, Karachi Malir. The above act on your part tantamounts to misconduct." The appellant in his response to the show-cause notice on 18-5-2001 denied the allegations.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the appellant was proceeded under Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules of 1973 but was retired under the provisions of Civil Servants Act of 1973 and as such the proceedings are void. In support of his contentions he relied on a ruling reported in 2003 PLC 600 and 2003 SCMR 1720=2003 PLC (C.S.) 1303.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents could not submit any evidence that the proceedings against the appellant had been conducted strictly in accordance with the Establishment Division's instructions wherein procedure has been prescribed for retiring an employee under section 13 of the Civil Servants Act 1973.
5. In view of the above facts, that no proceedings had taken place under section 13 of the Civil Servants Act of 1973 the impugned order becomes null and void which is set aside. Appellant is reinstated in service. Respondents are directed to conduct de novo proceedings against the appellant under the relevant law affording him full opportunity to defend the allegations which should be completed within a period of four months from the date of this judgment. The question of back benefits will be decided upon the result of the de novo proceedings. Announced in open Court. H.B.T./23/FST Order accordingly.