2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and another
| Citation | 2010 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 through Chief Secretary and another |
| Primary Law | Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1990 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1990 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 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: 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Chief Secretary 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 Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 4th November, 2009.
- 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
R. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)
Recovery of loss to government from pension/commutation of petitioner
Imposition of such penalty after retirement of petitioner from service
Plea of respondent that after his dismissal from service, he was reinstated by Chief Minister in review petition with minor penalty imposed on him, but in order of his reinstatement in service issued on 5-9-1997 by government, there was no mention of any minor penalty; that subsequently when he retired from service, government passed an order imposing such penalty of recovery, which could not be done without due notice to him and a proper inquiry under Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1990, which exercise had not taken place
Dismissal of petitioner's appeals by departmental authority and Service Tribunal
Petitioner, prima facie, appeared to have bee condemned unheard
Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in circumstances.
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. S.A.M./S-13/SC Leave granted.