2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ABDUL KARIM BURINO Versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others
| Citation | 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khilji Arif Hussain and Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL KARIM BURINO Versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others |
| Primary Law | Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khilji Arif Hussain and Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ABDUL KARIM BURINO Versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sanaullah Noor Ghouri, Advocate Supreme Court and Abdul Saeed Khan Ghouri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.
- Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos.1 to 3.
- It is contended by the learned Advocate for the appellant that the learned Federal Service Tribunal while ordering of the, de novo proceedings directed the respondent to complete the proceedings within a period of 4 months from the date of the order i.e. 28-2-20061but neither the proceedings were completed within four months nor show cause was issued within the stipulated period of time.
- On the other hand Mr. Mazhar Ali B. Chohan learned Advocate for the respondents argued that the delay in completion of proceeding was caused due to non-cooperative attitude of the appellant. However, he has failed to substantiate his contention by referring any document on record.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 3
Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.212(3)
Imposition of penalty of withholding increments
Both the counsel had stated that impugned judgment passed by the Service Tribunal could be set aside and authorities would hold de novo proceedings to be completed within 3 months; that employee would appear before the Inquiry Officer, who after recording the evidence would pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law
Appeal was allowed, impugned order was set aside
Authorities were directed to complete the de novo proceedings as per show-cause notice within three months from the date of order.
Judgment & Decree
This appeal with leave of Court has been directed against order dated 26-11-2009 passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi Bench whereby the learned Service Tribunal withheld two years' increment of the appellant. From the perusal of the record, it appears that vide order dated 28-2-2006 the learned Federal Service Tribunal remanded the matters for de novo proceedings, but the respondents instead of holding de novo proceedings passed ex parte order whereby penalty of withholding of increment of two years passed by the respondent was upheld. It is contended by the learned Advocate for the appellant that the learned Federal Service Tribunal while ordering of the, de novo proceedings directed the respondent to complete the proceedings within a period of 4 months from the date of the order i.e. 28-2-20061but neither the proceedings were completed within four months nor show cause was issued within the stipulated period of time. On the other hand Mr. Mazhar Ali B. Chohan learned Advocate for the respondents argued that the delay in completion of proceeding was caused due to non-cooperative attitude of the appellant. However, he has failed to substantiate his contention by referring any document on record. Both the learned counsel after arguing at length, stated that theft impugned judgment passed by the Federal Service Tribunal may be set aside and respondents will hold de novo proceedings which will be completed within 3 months from the date of this order. The respondent will appear before the Inquiry Officer on 20-9-2010, who after recording the evidence will pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law. For the foregoing reason listed appeal is allowed, impugned order, dated 26-11-2009 is set aside. Respondent is directed to complete the `de novo proceedings as per show-cause notice within three months from the date of order. The appellant will appear before the Inquiry Officer on 20-9-2010. H.B.T./A-110/SC Order accordingly.