1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ABDUL RAUF Versus LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE through Registrar,
| Citation | 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Mahntud Aslam Pirzada, Chainnan and |
| Parties | ABDUL RAUF Versus LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE through Registrar, |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
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 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Mahntud Aslam Pirzada, Chainnan and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ABDUL RAUF Versus LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE through Registrar,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Masood for Appellant.
- Izhar-ul-Haq for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 19th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
Rr. 4 & 5--Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4--Dismissal from service--Initially appellant was compulsorily retired from service; subsequently he was dismissed from service--Appellant having ceased to be a civil servant, of passing of initial order of his retirement from service, he no longer remained civil servant--Appellant's appeal against subsequent order of dismissal was thus not competent.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD MAHMUD ASLAM PIRZADA (CHAIRMAN). Abdur Rauf has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal: Act, 1974 against dismissal order passed by respondent No. 2 dated 6-1-1988. The appellant has impleaded Lahore High Court through Registrar as well as District and Sessions Judge, Sargodha as respondents. Through this appeal he has prayed that impugned order be set aside and appeal be accepted.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant while posted as Ahlmad was charge-sheeted. Civil Judge, Rhalwal as Enquiry Officer proceeded against him and ultimately on 18-7-1987 he was retired compulsorily under the Punjab Civil Servants (E & D) Rules, 1975. Later on, on 6-1-1988 respondent No. 2 passed yet another order of dismissal from service against the appellant under the Punjab Civil Servants (E & D) Rules, 1975. Hence this appeal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record of this case carefully.
4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on compulsory retirement of the appellant w.e.f. 18-7-1987 he remained no longer a civil servant and therefore, respondent No. 2 was not competent to pass subsequent order of dismissal dated 6-1-1988 against him under the Punjab Civil Servants (E & D) Rules, 1975. The learned counsel for the respondents has conceded to the aforestated position of the matter.
5. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and find that the appellant ceased to be a "civil servant" w.e.f. 18-7-1987.
6. Resultantly we dismiss the instant appeal against the subsequent dismissal order dated 6-1-1988 as being incompetent.
7. There will be no order as to costs. A.A./267/Sr. P Appeal dismissed.