1987 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MOULA BUX Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF SIND through Secretary, Government of Sind. S&GAD, Karachi and 2 others
| Citation | 1987 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Sind |
| Bench Members | Munawar Ali Khan, Chairman, Dr. A.Q. Qazi and Manzoorul Haq Effendi, Members |
| Parties | MOULA BUX Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF SIND through Secretary, Government of Sind. S&GAD, Karachi and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Sind bench comprising: Munawar Ali Khan, Chairman, Dr. A.Q. Qazi and Manzoorul Haq Effendi, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MOULA BUX Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF SIND through Secretary, Government of Sind. S&GAD, Karachi and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mulazim Hussain Kolachi for Appellant.
- Rasheed Akhtar Qureshi for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 17th May, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.4‑‑Services of appellant terminated on ground of his being a previously dismissed civil servant‑‑No show‑cause notice served on appellant before termination‑‑Effect‑‑Where no notice was given to appellant before passing of order of termination, such civil servant, Held, got no opportunity to explain if allegations of his being a d missed civil servant were correct‑‑Such termination of services being accompanied by blemish that appellant was a previously dismissed civil servant, he was entitled to show‑cause notice‑‑Order of termination of services without show‑cause notice being not sustainable was set aside by Service Tribunal and case remanded to Authority to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
MUNAWAR ALI KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑By this appeal appellant Moula Bux has challenged the order of termination of his service. The impugned order which is dated 1‑11‑1981 reads as under:‑ In pursuance of Commissioner, Hyderabad's letter No. 1537‑Admn/81, dated 20‑10‑1981, services of Munshi Moula Bux Bhatti, Tapedar are hereby terminated with immediate effect as he is dismissed Tapedar. for (Muhammad Ismail) Deputy Commissioner, Sanghar." It is clear from the above order that the services of the appellant were dispensed with on the ground that he was a dismissed Tapedar. However, it is an admitted position that no show‑cause notice was given to the appellant before passing of the impugned, order. Therefore, he got no opportunity to explain if the allegations of his being dismissed Tapedar were correct. Even otherwise the termination of his services was not simpliciter. It was accompanied by blemish namely that he was a dismissed Tapedar. In such a case the appellant was entitled to show‑cause notice which as pointed out earlier was not given to him. Accordingly we are of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained which is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with no order as to costs. However this is a fit case to be, remanded back to the authorities concerned with a direction, that they may proceed afresh in accordance with the Sind Civil Servants' (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973 and then pass such order as is deemed appropriate. Pending conclusion of departmental action against the appellant he will remain under suspension unless the competent authority decides in its discretion to reinstate him in service. A.A./129/Sr.S. Case remanded.