1992 PLP (CS (PLC(CS))
JAVID IQBAL Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
| Citation | 1992 PLP (CS (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal (AJ&K) |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member |
| Parties | JAVID IQBAL Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (CS (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (CS (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal (AJ&K) bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Sajawal Khan, Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Kayani, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (CS (PLC(CS)) (JAVID IQBAL Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant. Addl. A.-G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil servant was discharged from service by Authority cm charge of certain misdeeds and alleged moral turpitude
Charges brought against civil servant, admittedly were not proved before Inquiry Officer and he was not found guilty, but Authority condemned and removed civil servant out of service without adverting himself to contents of inquiry report
Authority, who held double function as Authority and Authorised Officer in case of civil servant, must not have substituted himself to the second Inquiry Officer after he had received report of Inquiry Officer by which civil servant was absolved of charges brought against him
Action taken by Authority against civil servant which was quite unjust and not free front bias, could not be maintained.
Judgment & Decree
AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR and 2 others Service Appeal No. 5112 of l91M, decided on 13th October, 1991.
Civil servant was discharged from service by Authority cm charge of certain misdeeds and alleged moral turpitude
Charges brought against civil servant, admittedly were not proved before Inquiry Officer and he was not found guilty, but Authority condemned and removed civil servant out of service without adverting himself to contents of inquiry report
Authority, who held double function as Authority and Authorised Officer in case of civil servant, must not have substituted himself to the second Inquiry Officer after he had received report of Inquiry Officer by which civil servant was absolved of charges brought against him
Action taken by Authority against civil servant which was quite unjust and not free front bias, could not be maintained. Kh. Abdus Samad for Appellant. Addl. A.-G. for Respondents.