2004 PLP 281 (SCMR)
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Education (EE), Government of the Punjab, Lahore and others — Petitioners Versus LIAQAT ALI — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 281 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Falak Sher, JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Education (EE), Government of the Punjab, Lahore and others — Petitioners Versus LIAQAT ALI — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 281 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 281 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Falak Sher, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 281 (SCMR) (PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Education (EE), Government of the Punjab, Lahore and others — Petitioners Versus LIAQAT ALI — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif Butt, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yusuf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent
- Date of hearing: 5th May, 2003
- 3. Mr. Muhammad Sharif Butt, learned Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of Province of the Punjab and contended strenuously that the learned Service Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the respondent had procured his appointment by implying deceitful means and it was a bogus appointment for all practical purposes. It is also contended that the learned Service Tribunal has ignored the inquiry report furnished by the Deputy District Education Officer showing that tile respondent succeeded in getting bogus appointment which aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice.
- 4. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of petitioner in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. The judgment impugned has been perused carefully. After having gone through the entire record we are of the considered opinion that the charges levelled against the respondent could not be substantiated on the basis of worthy of credence documentary evidence. Insofar as the authenticity of documents on the basis whereof appointment was made had been confirmed by the Deputy District Education Officer by means of letter dated 5-3-1997. The learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of Government of the Punjab when confronted with the said position and asked how the appointment could be declared bogus in view of the authenticity of the documents, no plausible reasoning could be given. It .is worth-mentioning that in spite of various directions the inquiry report could not be produced before the Service Tribunal and thus the presumption would ' be that no such inquiry was ever got conducted. Non-mentioning of the name of respondent in the dispatch register would have no bearing whatsoever on the merits of the case. The respondent is admittedly in service since 1993 and cannot be removed from service on vague and sketchy grounds which remained unsubstantiated.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-8-2001 of the Punjab Service- Tribunal; Lahore passed in Appeal No.3060 of 2000).
R.4(l)(b)(v)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Dismissal from service after six years on ground of misconduct and appointment being against rules
Service Tribunal set aside such order in appeal filed by the civil servant
Authenticity of documents on basis whereof appointment was made, had been confirmed by appointing Authority
Charges against civil servant could not be substantiated on the basis of worthy of credence documentary evidence
Non-production of inquiry report before Service Tribunal, inspite of its various directions would give rise to the presumption that no such inquiry had ever been conducted
Non-mentioning of name of civil servant in the Dispatch Register would have no bearing on merits of the case
No question of law of public importance was involved--Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave to appeal.
Judgment & Decree
JAVED IQBAL, J.
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21-8-2001 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appeal preferred on behalf of respondent has been accepted by setting aside the order dated 8-6-2000 whereby the respondent was removed from service.
2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that Liaqat Ali (respondent) was appointed as PTC teacher on 13-5-1993 on the recommendation of Departmental Selection Committee and remained in service till 12-11-1999 when disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on account of misconduct and appointment against rules which culminated into his removal from service vide order dated 8-6-2000. After exhausting departmental remedies the respondent approached learned Punjab Service Tribunal by means of appeal which has been accepted, hence this petition.
3. Mr. Muhammad Sharif Butt, learned Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of Province of the Punjab and contended strenuously that the learned Service Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the respondent had procured his appointment by implying deceitful means and it was a bogus appointment for all practical purposes. It is also contended that the learned Service Tribunal has ignored the inquiry report furnished by the Deputy District Education Officer showing that tile respondent succeeded in getting bogus appointment which aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice.
4. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of petitioner in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. The judgment impugned has been perused carefully. After having gone through the entire record we are of the considered opinion that the charges levelled against the respondent could not be substantiated on the basis of worthy of credence documentary evidence. Insofar as the authenticity of documents on the basis whereof appointment was made had been confirmed by the Deputy District Education Officer by means of letter dated 5-3-1997. The learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of Government of the Punjab when confronted with the said position and asked how the appointment could be declared bogus in view of the authenticity of the documents, no plausible reasoning could be given. It .is worth-mentioning that in spite of various directions the inquiry report could not be produced before the Service Tribunal and thus the presumption would ' be that no such inquiry was ever got conducted. Non-mentioning of the name of respondent in the dispatch register would have no bearing whatsoever on the merits of the case. The respondent is admittedly in service since 1993 and cannot be removed from service on vague and sketchy grounds which remained unsubstantiated. '
5. The conclusion arrived at by the learned Service Tribunal is strictly in accordance with law, settled norms of justice and being well -founded hardly warrants any interference. Besides that no question of law of public importance is involved in the matter on the basis whereof leave could be granted. The petition being meritless is dismissed and leave refused. S. A. K./P-113/S Leave refused.