2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and another
| Citation | 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Hamid Farooq, Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Sarmad Jalal Osmany, JJ |
| Parties | SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and another |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Hamid Farooq, Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Sarmad Jalal Osmany, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ansari Abdul Latif, Advocate Supreme Court and Mazher Ali B. Chohan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th November, 2008.
- SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.---Mr. Ansari Abdul Latif, learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that the petitioner was proceeded against departmentally and the punishment of dismissal from service was imposed upon him which was never challenged before any forum. However, he filed a review petition before the then Chief Minister, Sindh and per the summary he was reinstated with minor penalty being imposed upon him. However, per the order of reinstatement issued by the Government of Sindh there is no mention of any minor penalty at all. Subsequently, the petitioner retired from service but surprisingly thereafter the Government of Sindh passed an order imposing a minor penalty upon the petitioner being recovery of the loss to the Government to the tune of Rs.11,31,916 from his pension/commutation. Thereafter the petitioner filed a departmental appeal without any success and then approached the learned Sindh Service Tribunal with the same result. Hence this petition.
- 2. Learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that according to the petitioner's reinstatement order dated 5-9-1997, there is no mention of any minor penalty and hence the same cannot be imposed without due notice to the petitioner and a proper inquiry under the rules. Additionally, the Sindh Government E&D Rules were replaced by the Removal from Service Ordinance, 2000 on 30-8-2000. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to be proceeded against under the said rules which exercise has yet not taken place.
- 3. We have heard learned Advocate Supreme Court and perused the impugned judgment.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal against the judgment, dated 31-1-2008 passed by Sindh Service Tribunal at Karachi in Appeal No.368 of 2005 (Shafi Muhammad Sand v. Government of Sindh and another).
Art. 212(3)
Departmental order of reinstatement nowhere mentioned any minor penalty for the civil servant
Contention of the civil servant was that in view of reinstatement order no minor penalty could be imposed without notice to the civil servant and a proper inquiry under the Rules, consequently the civil servant was entitled to be proceeded against under the relevant Rules which exercise had yet not been taken
Held, prima facie it appeared that the civil servant was condemned unheard
Supreme Court while granting leave, converted the petition for leave to appeal into an appeal and directed the same to be listed in due course.
Judgment & Decree
SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.
Mr. Ansari Abdul Latif, learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that the petitioner was proceeded against departmentally and the punishment of dismissal from service was imposed upon him which was never challenged before any forum. However, he filed a review petition before the then Chief Minister, Sindh and per the summary he was reinstated with minor penalty being imposed upon him. However, per the order of reinstatement issued by the Government of Sindh there is no mention of any minor penalty at all. Subsequently, the petitioner retired from service but surprisingly thereafter the Government of Sindh passed an order imposing a minor penalty upon the petitioner being recovery of the loss to the Government to the tune of Rs.11,31,916 from his pension/commutation. Thereafter the petitioner filed a departmental appeal without any success and then approached the learned Sindh Service Tribunal with the same result. Hence this petition.
2. Learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that according to the petitioner's reinstatement order dated 5-9-1997, there is no mention of any minor penalty and hence the same cannot be imposed without due notice to the petitioner and a proper inquiry under the rules. Additionally, the Sindh Government E&D Rules were replaced by the Removal from Service Ordinance, 2000 on 30-8-2000. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to be proceeded against under the said rules which exercise has yet not taken place.
3. We have heard learned Advocate Supreme Court and perused the impugned judgment.
4. Prima facie it appears that the petitioner was condemned un heard. Hence we would, while granting leave, convert this petition into an appeal. To be listed in due course. M.B.A./S-50/SC Order accordingly.