2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Prof. MUHAMMAD ALI SHAIKH Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and others
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | : Amanullah Abbasi, Chairman and Muhammad Iqbal Khan, Member |
| Parties | Prof. MUHAMMAD ALI SHAIKH Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and others |
| Primary Law | Civil Service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: : Amanullah Abbasi, Chairman and Muhammad Iqbal Khan, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Prof. MUHAMMAD ALI SHAIKH Versus SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, ISLAMABAD and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Nawaz Shaikh for Appellant.
- AMANULLAH ABBASI (CHAIRMAN).‑‑‑Learned Advocates for both the parties have been heard. It is admitted in the parawise objections that the appellant had submitted resignation from service on 20‑9‑2000 and while the case of resignation was under process, the appellant had submitted an application for withdrawal of his resignation on 23‑9‑2000 which was received in the Ministry of Education on 25‑9‑2000. The impugned order is dated 19‑10‑2000 whereby, the resignation was accepted effective from 22‑9‑2000. The question for consideration is that the appellant had withdrawn his‑ resignation after two days and he has supported his arguments by referring to Serial No.19 of Esta code, Edition 1989 at page 396 which is as under:‑‑
- It is clearly mentioned that in case` the Government servant withdraws resignation before its acceptance by the Competent Authority, the resignation should be deemed to have been withdrawn. In view of this legal position the impugned order dated 19-10‑2000 is not justified. We therefore, accept the appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 19‑10‑2000 and the appellant will be deemed to have continued as Principal, Sindh Madarasat‑ul‑Islam, Karachi from the date he tendered his resignation i.e. 20‑9‑2000. It is left open for respondents to decide arrears of the pay and other benefits of appellant in accordance with law for the period between the passing of impugned order and reinstatement.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Resignation‑‑‑Withdrawal of resignation‑‑‑Civil servant had submitted his resignation from service, but while case of resignation was under process, he had submitted an application for withdrawal of the same two days after submission‑of his resignation which was duly received in the Department‑‑ Resignation of civil servant was accepted by Authority after about one month from submission of application for withdrawal of resignation‑‑‑ESTACODE, Edition (1989) clearly mentioned that in case civil servant would withdraw his resignation before the same was accepted by Competent Authority, resignation would be deemed to have been withdrawn‑‑‑Order whereby resignation of civil servant was accepted by Authority, was not justified and same was set aside‑‑‑Civil servant would be deemed to have continued in service from the date he had) submitted his resignation. Niaz Ahmed Khan, Standing Counsel alongwith Shabbir Ahmed, Acting Principal and Shah Muhammad, Admin. Officer, Sindh Madarasat‑ul- Islam, Karachi, Departmental Representatives.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Resignation‑‑‑Withdrawal of resignation‑‑‑Civil servant had submitted his resignation from service, but while case of resignation was under process, he had submitted an application for withdrawal of the same two days after submission‑of his resignation which was duly received in the Department‑‑ Resignation of civil servant was accepted by Authority after about one month from submission of application for withdrawal of resignation‑‑‑ESTACODE, Edition (1989) clearly mentioned that in case civil servant would withdraw his resignation before the same was accepted by Competent Authority, resignation would be deemed to have been withdrawn‑‑‑Order whereby resignation of civil servant was accepted by Authority, was not justified and same was set aside‑‑‑Civil servant would be deemed to have continued in service from the date he had) submitted his resignation. Muhammad Nawaz Shaikh for Appellant. Niaz Ahmed Khan, Standing Counsel alongwith Shabbir Ahmed, Acting Principal and Shah Muhammad, Admin. Officer, Sindh Madarasat‑ul- Islam, Karachi, Departmental Representatives. AMANULLAH ABBASI (CHAIRMAN).‑‑‑Learned Advocates for both the parties have been heard. It is admitted in the parawise objections that the appellant had submitted resignation from service on 20‑9‑2000 and while the case of resignation was under process, the appellant had submitted an application for withdrawal of his resignation on 23‑9‑2000 which was received in the Ministry of Education on 25‑9‑2000. The impugned order is dated 19‑10‑2000 whereby, the resignation was accepted effective from 22‑9‑2000. The question for consideration is that the appellant had withdrawn his‑ resignation after two days and he has supported his arguments by referring to Serial No.19 of Esta code, Edition 1989 at page 396 which is as under:‑‑ "Withdrawal of Resignation Before Acceptance:‑‑In case Government servant withdraws resignation before it .is accepted by the Competent Authority, the resignation should be deemed to have been withdrawn. " It is clearly mentioned that in case` the Government servant withdraws resignation before its acceptance by the Competent Authority, the resignation should be deemed to have been withdrawn. In view of this legal position the impugned order dated 19-10‑2000 is not justified. We therefore, accept the appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 19‑10‑2000 and the appellant will be deemed to have continued as Principal, Sindh Madarasat‑ul‑Islam, Karachi from the date he tendered his resignation i.e. 20‑9‑2000. It is left open for respondents to decide arrears of the pay and other benefits of appellant in accordance with law for the period between the passing of impugned order and reinstatement.
2. Announced in the open Court. H.B.T./209/FST Appeal accepted.