PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUHAMMAD BASHIR Versus AUDITOR GENERAL PAKISTAN

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore High Court
Decided Date
Writ Petition No. 4819-S of 1991, decided on 16th June, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Irshad Hassan Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Lahore High Court
Bench Members Irshad Hassan Khan, J
Parties MUHAMMAD BASHIR Versus AUDITOR GENERAL PAKISTAN
Primary Law Civil service
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Irshad Hassan Khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD BASHIR Versus AUDITOR GENERAL PAKISTAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil service

Representation

  • Muhammad Hussain Malik for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Disciplinary proceedings

Mere fact that employee in criminal case registered against him on same subject-matter had been acquitted, would not ipso facto absolve him from being proceeded against departmentally on basis of evidence that could be available with competent Authority

If ultimately, an adverse order would be passed against employee by competent Authority, he could have recourse to appropriate proceedings before Service Tribunal"

Judgment & Decree

Versus AUDITOR GENERAL PAKISTAN Writ Petition No. 4819-S of 1991, decided on 16th June, 1991.

Disciplinary proceedings

Mere fact that employee in criminal case registered against him on same subject-matter had been acquitted, would not ipso facto absolve him from being proceeded against departmentally on basis of evidence that could be available with competent Authority

If ultimately, an adverse order would be passed against employee by competent Authority, he could have recourse to appropriate proceedings before Service Tribunal" Muhammad Hussain Malik for Petitioner.