1991 PLP 1545 (SCMR)
WAPDA through Chairman — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI SHAH — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1545 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saaod Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ |
| Parties | WAPDA through Chairman — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI SHAH — Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1545 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1545 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saaod 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: 1991 PLP 1545 (SCMR) (WAPDA through Chairman — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ALI SHAH — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record and Akram Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1988.
- Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record and Akram Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the order dated 19-4-1987 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad at Lahore, in Appeal No. 67(L) of 1983).
S. 17(1-A)
Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
Employee working as Lineman was removed from service
Service Tribunal on appeal filed against such removal, substituted order of removal with one of retirement of respondent on account of his long service
Authority contended that record of employee even according to finding of Service Tribunal, was such that it made him entirely unsuitable person to be retained in service and as such order of removal from service could not have been substituted with that of his retirement
Contention of petitioner Authority needing examination
Leave to appeal was granted.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑The respondent was a Lineman serving under the petitioner. On 12‑1‑1983, by an order made under section 17(1‑A), Water and Power Development Authority Act, he was removed from service. He filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal to challenge the order of his removal. The learned Tribunal partly accepted the appeal and substituted the order of removal with one of retirement on account of his long service. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of the learned Tribunal.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that according to the finding of the learned Tribunal itself, the record of the respondent was such that it made him an entirely unsuitable person to be retained in service. In the circumstances, it could not have substituted the order of removal from service with that of retirement. This contention needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security far costs in the sum of Rs.2,
000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. H.B.T./W‑63/S Leave granted.