2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and others
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and others |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hafiz Tariq Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ms. Yasmeen Sehgal, A.A.-G. and Imtiaz Ali, Legal Advisor for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 13th May, 2002.
- 3. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner and having gone through the contents of the reply of show cause notice particularly para No.3, we are of the opinion that petitioner himself has made admission in unequivocal terms about accepting share of Rs.40/50 per night out of the money; which he used to charge according to his contention on behalf of Assistant Sub-Inspector from the drivers of the vehicles. Therefore, no case is made out for exercise of jurisdiction by this Court under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order dated 22-12-1998 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No.3897 of 1997).
S.4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
In reply to show-cause notice, the civil servant had made admission about accepting share of bribery which he used to charge on behalf of his senior official from the drivers of vehicles
Service Tribunal had rightly dismissed appeal filed by the civil servant
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
This petition for leave to appeal has beers filed against the judgment dated 22nd December, 1998 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore whereby appeal filed by petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that petitioner was posted at police check post Khamra Kalan District Sargodha, when he indulged in immoral acts like drinking and adultery etc. Besides posing himself as Head Constable for traffic checking of vehicles. On receipt of report about his aforesaid activities, DSP Telecommunication was appointed to hold an inquiry and submit' his report. According to report, the petitioner was prima facie found guilty for such activities and thus not entitled to be retained in police service. Accordingly, a show-cause notice was issued to him and he was required to explain his position within a given period. The explanation furnished by him was found unsatisfactory as such after affording him opportunity of personal hearing, the Superintendent of Police, Telecommunication dismissed him from service vide order dated 25th August 1996. Petitioner being aggrieved from the dismissal order, after availing departmental remedies without success, filed an appeal before Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore which has been dismissed by means of impugned order. As such instant petition has been filed.
3. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner and having gone through the contents of the reply of show cause notice particularly para No.3, we are of the opinion that petitioner himself has made admission in unequivocal terms about accepting share of Rs.40/50 per night out of the money; which he used to charge according to his contention on behalf of Assistant Sub-Inspector from the drivers of the vehicles. Therefore, no case is made out for exercise of jurisdiction by this Court under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus, petition is dismissed and leave declined. M.H./M-668/S Petition dismissed.