1985 PLP 1747 (SCMR)
INAYATULLAH KHAN — Appellant Versus THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1747 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, C. J., Muhammad Afzal Zullah, |
| Parties | INAYATULLAH KHAN — Appellant Versus THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT |
| Primary Law | (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1747 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 1747 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, C. J., Muhammad Afzal Zullah,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1747 (SCMR) (INAYATULLAH KHAN — Appellant Versus THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Samad Khan, Advocate-on-Record Supreme Court of Pakistan, Peshawar for Appellant.
- Mian Muhammad Ajmal, Asstt. A.-G., N.-W.F.P., Peshawar for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 16th June, 1985.
- Abdul Samad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record Supreme Court of Pakistan, Peshawar for Appellant.
- Mian Muhammad Ajmal, Asstt. A.‑G., N.‑W.F.P., Peshawar for Respondent.
- The Assistant Advocate‑General appeared today on behalf of the respondent and conceded on the basis of the law laid down in Syed Mir Muhammad v. N.W.F.P. Government through Chief Secretary P L D 1981 S C 176 and Qazi Faizul Haq v. N.‑W.F.P. through the Chief Secretary 1984 S C M R 451, that in view of the failure to give a second show‑cause notice there has been a violation of the principles; of natural justice and as such the case should be remanded to the Authorised Officer from the stage at which this second show‑cause notice should have been given to the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant also agreed to this submission for remand.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 26-9-1978 passed by the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 39 of 1976).
Art. 212--Civil service--Compulsory retirement--Natural justice, principles of--Leave to appeal granted to examine question amongst others as to whether, failure to give a final show-cause notice against proposed penalty was violative of principles of natural justice. (b) Civil service -Compulsory retirement--Failure to give a second show-cause notice, held, was a violation of principles of natural justice--Case remanded to authorised officer from stage at which second show-cause notice should have been given to civil servant.--[Natural justice, principles of. Syed Mir Muhammad v. N.-W.F.P. Government through Chief Secretary P L D 1981 S C 176 and Qazi Faizul Haq v. N.-W.F.P. through the Chief Secretary 1984 S C M It 451 mentioned.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Civil service ‑Compulsory retirement‑‑Failure to give a second show‑cause notice, held, was a violation of principles of natural justice‑‑Case remanded to authorised officer from stage at which second show‑cause notice should have been given to civil servant.‑‑[Natural justice, principles of. Syed Mir Muhammad v. N.‑W.F.P. Government through Chief Secretary P L D 1981 S C 176 and Qazi Faizul Haq v. N.‑W.F.P. through the Chief Secretary 1984 S C M It 451 mentioned. Abdul Samad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record Supreme Court of Pakistan, Peshawar for Appellant. Mian Muhammad Ajmal, Asstt. A.‑G., N.‑W.F.P., Peshawar for Respondent. Date of hearing: 16th June, 1985. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.‑‑ Leave to appeal was granted to examine questions amongst others as to whether the failure to give a final show‑cause notice against the proposed penalty was violative of the principles of natural justice. The appellant herein at the relevant time was a Reader in the Court of a Magistrate at Peshawar, and departmental proceedings were taken against him for having colluded with the accused in a complaint case under sections 363, 366 and 376, P.P.C. and his counsel for procuring a bail order and having been found guilty of misconduct, was compulsorily retired from service. The appeal to the Service Tribunal did not succeed, but leave was granted by this Court to examine this question amongst others. The Assistant Advocate‑General appeared today on behalf of the respondent and conceded on the basis of the law laid down in Syed Mir Muhammad v. N.W.F.P. Government through Chief Secretary P L D 1981 S C 176 and Qazi Faizul Haq v. N.‑W.F.P. through the Chief Secretary 1984 S C M R 451, that in view of the failure to give a second show‑cause notice there has been a violation of the principles; of natural justice and as such the case should be remanded to the Authorised Officer from the stage at which this second show‑cause notice should have been given to the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant also agreed to this submission for remand. Accordingly, while allowing the appeal we would remand the case to the Authorised Officer for complying with this formality from the stage indicated herein above and to decide it afresh. There will be no order as to costs. M. B. A. Appeal allowed.