1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
LIAQUAT ALI SHAHID Versus THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, RAWALPINDI and 2 others
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | S.M. Ishaq and Ch. Hasan Nawaz Members |
| Parties | LIAQUAT ALI SHAHID Versus THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, RAWALPINDI and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service 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 Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: S.M. Ishaq and Ch. Hasan Nawaz Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (LIAQUAT ALI SHAHID Versus THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, RAWALPINDI and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant.
- Hafiz S.A. Rahman for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th October, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
Punishing Authority
Order terminating services of civil servant subsequently was cancelled by Authority, but after such cancellation same Authority revised its order and again terminated services of civil servant
Original punishing Authority could not revise its own punishing orders either merely on reconsideration or on discovery of some flaws in statutory procedure after original orders were passed, but before any appeal had been preferred against those orders-- Punishing Authority was not competent to revise or modify its orders before departmental appeal was filed against those orders much less after such appeal had been filed by civil servant, because in the event of a departmental appeal, Appellate authority becomes seized of the matter and in that situation it would, go beyond jurisdiction of punishing Authority to revise its own order and substitute it with an order imposing entirely a different penalty
Not within the powers of punishing Authority to replace its earlier order with subsequent order even though it had been done by Authority on advice of Justice Division as claimed by Authority
Order passed against civil servant without holding any enquiry against him, could not sustain.
Judgment & Decree
Appeal No. 467(R) of 1990, decided on 27th October, 1991. Civil service
Punishing Authority
Order terminating services of civil servant subsequently was cancelled by Authority, but after such cancellation same Authority revised its order and again terminated services of civil servant
Original punishing Authority could not revise its own punishing orders either merely on reconsideration or on discovery of some flaws in statutory procedure after original orders were passed, but before any appeal had been preferred against those orders-- Punishing Authority was not competent to revise or modify its orders before departmental appeal was filed against those orders much less after such appeal had been filed by civil servant, because in the event of a departmental appeal, Appellate authority becomes seized of the matter and in that situation it would, go beyond jurisdiction of punishing Authority to revise its own order and substitute it with an order imposing entirely a different penalty
Not within the powers of punishing Authority to replace its earlier order with subsequent order even though it had been done by Authority on advice of Justice Division as claimed by Authority
Order passed against civil servant without holding any enquiry against him, could not sustain. Raja Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant. Hafiz S.A. Rahman for Respondents. Date of hearing: 27th October, 1991.