1988 PLP 673 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ARIF SIDDIQI‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Islamabad‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 673 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, S.A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ARIF SIDDIQI‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Islamabad‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 673 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 673 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, S.A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 673 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ARIF SIDDIQI‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Islamabad‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Hafeez Memon, Advocate Supreme Court and Muzaffar Ali Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 27th January, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 16‑9‑1984 passed in Appeal No.109(k) of 1983). ‑‑‑R.6‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Art. 212 (3) Violation of provisions of R.6‑‑Effect of‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider contention that proper procedure as laid down in R.6 of Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 was not followed inasmuch as no inquiry as contemplated in the rule, was held; no proper opportunity of hearing was given to petitioner as the inquiry officer had mainly proceeded to decide case in an inquisitorial manner by issuing a questionnaire, on which petitioner was cross‑examined in his defence.
Judgment & Decree
S.A.NUSRAT, J.‑‑This petition arises out of the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 16‑9‑1984. 2. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that proper procedure as laid down in rule 6 of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973, was not followed in this case inasmuch as no inquiry as contemplated in the rule, was held; no proper opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner as the Inquiry Officer had mainly proceeded to decide the case in an inquisitorial manner by issuing a questionnaire, on which the petitioner was cross‑examined in his defence. 3. The above contention, inter alia, requires examination. Leave is accordingly granted. The appeal will be heard on the presents record with permission to file documents, if any, by the parties. The appeal is directed to be fixed at an early date. M.I. /M‑349/S Leave granted.