2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
IZZAT BAIG AWAN Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Qazi Muhammad Farooq, Tanvir Ahmad Khan and Sardar Muhammad Raza, JJ, |
| Parties | IZZAT BAIG AWAN Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED |
| Primary Law | (a) Bank employees, (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Bank employees, (b) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973) 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: Qazi Muhammad Farooq, Tanvir Ahmad Khan and Sardar Muhammad Raza, 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)) (IZZAT BAIG AWAN Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. Babar Awan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ajmal Kamal, Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 23rd July, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 10-5-2001 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad in Appeal No.98(R)CE of 2000).
Institution of banking is one of trust reposed by public at large and Bank Authorities in peculiar nature of the duties of their employees cannot afford breach of trust by retaining in service people who are involved in criminal. cases.
Ss. 2-A & 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
Absence from duty
Involvement in criminal case
On such involvement, the Bank employee absented himself from duty
Bank Authorities issued show-cause notice and after affording opportunity of hearing to the Bank employee, removed him from service-- Service Tribunal maintained the order of removal from service
Plea raised by the employee was that his absence was unavoidable
Absence whether avoidable or unavoidable was the sole concern of the official
Bank could not afford the luxury of absence as well as loss of goodwill
Case of laxity on the part of the employee was proved and his retention in service being not in the interest of the Bank, he was rightly removed
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA, J.
Izzat Baig Awan, former Cashier of Habib Bank Limited, has filed this petition for leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution against ,the judgment, dated 10-5-2001 passed in Appeal No.98(R)CE of 2000 by Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed in limine by a two-member Bench of the Tribunal headed by the Chairman.
2. Izzat Haig Awan being a Cashier of Habib Bank Limited at Kharian Branch was removed from service on 27-1-2000 on charges of indiscipline and absence from duty. The reason for absence was his involvement in a case of F.I.R. No.233, dated 19-9-1998 under sections 302/324/337/427/147/149, P.P.C.
3. A proper show-cause notice had duly been issued to the petitioner which he had the opportunity to meet with. His absence was not only absolutely clear but besides that he had also gone into abscondence which happended to enhance his absence. The institution of bank is one of trust resposed by the public at large and they, in the peculiar nature of the duties of their employees, cannot afford the breach of trust by retaining in service people who are involved in criminal cases and whose absence therefrom, as it was in the instant case, was not only obvious but unavoidable on the part of the official concerned. The absence whether avoidable or unavoidable is the sole headache of the official but so far as the bank is concerned, it cannot afford the luxury of the absence as well as the loss of goodwill.
4. The case of laxity on part of the petitioner was proved and hence his retention in service being not in the interest of the bank, he was rightly removed. There being no merit in the petition, it is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. M.H./I-69/S Petition dismissed.