PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus GHULAM FARID

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Appeal Nor 245 of 1987, decided on 28th April, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Shakurul Salam and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Shakurul Salam and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ
Parties WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus GHULAM FARID
Primary Law West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958)
💡 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: West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958) 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 Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Shakurul Salam and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus GHULAM FARID). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958)

Representation

  • Syed Iftikhar Ahmad. Senior Advocate, Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad Oadri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.
  • Date of hearing: 28th April 1991.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 11-7-1984 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No. 445 of 1982)

S. 17(1-A)

Removal of employee in exercise of summary powers-- Validity

Action of Authority in removing employee must rest on some material or initiated after due application of mind thereto, by competent Authority

Where ouster of employee under summary powers was not founded on any evidence, same would be merely an arbitrary and capricious exercise of power

Judgment of Service Tribunal indicated that despite its demand, employee's service record, A.C.Rs. and other material showing that he was corrupt and inefficient were never produced before it

Even departmental record was not placed before Court to demonstrate that employee's case was duly processed, and on basis of his service record and other material, he was not considered fit for retention in service

During hearing of appeal employee's acquittal from charge of having accepted illegal gratification from some client also came to light

In absence of relevant material, order regarding employee's removal from service could not be sustained; such order was rendered as an order not based on any evidence-- Employee was thus, entitled to reinstatement in service. Respondent in person.

Judgment & Decree

Civil Appeal Nor 245 of 1987, decided on 28th April, 1991. (On appeal from the judgment dated 11-7-1984 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, passed in Appeal No. 445 of 1982)

S. 17(1-A)

Removal of employee in exercise of summary powers-- Validity

Action of Authority in removing employee must rest on some material or initiated after due application of mind thereto, by competent Authority

Where ouster of employee under summary powers was not founded on any evidence, same would be merely an arbitrary and capricious exercise of power

Judgment of Service Tribunal indicated that despite its demand, employee's service record, A.C.Rs. and other material showing that he was corrupt and inefficient were never produced before it

Even departmental record was not placed before Court to demonstrate that employee's case was duly processed, and on basis of his service record and other material, he was not considered fit for retention in service

During hearing of appeal employee's acquittal from charge of having accepted illegal gratification from some client also came to light

In absence of relevant material, order regarding employee's removal from service could not be sustained; such order was rendered as an order not based on any evidence-- Employee was thus, entitled to reinstatement in service. Syed Iftikhar Ahmad. Senior Advocate, Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad Oadri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Respondent in person. Date of hearing: 28th April 1991.