1987 PLP 122 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD, MULTAN REGION and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 122 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD, MULTAN REGION and another‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 122 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 122 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 122 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD, MULTAN REGION and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing 11th November, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, dated 29‑4‑1986, passed in Appeal No.397/328 of 1985). ‑‑‑Art. 212‑‑Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, R.6(3)‑‑Dismissal from service for misconduct‑‑Appeal dismissed by Service Tribunal‑‑Procedure adopted by authority in imposing penalty being strictly in accordance with law, Tribunal, held, justified in dismissing appeal of petitioner‑‑No ground for interference shown‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art. 212‑‑Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, R.6(3)‑‑Dismissal from service for misconduct‑‑Appeal dismissed by Service Tribunal‑‑Procedure adopted by authority in imposing penalty being strictly in accordance with law, Tribunal, held, justified in dismissing appeal of petitioner‑‑No ground for interference shown‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing 11th November, 1986. ALI HUSSAIN QAZIBASH, J.‑‑ Muhammad Ashraf seeks leave to appeal from the order of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, dated 29‑4‑1986, whereby his appeal was dismissed.
2. The facts are that the petitioner was posted at P.R. Centre Joeya, District Okara, during the 1983‑84 Scheme. During the tenure of his service, wheat weighing 8837.850 M.Tons was purchased and despatched to P.R.Centre Shergarh but it was reported that wheat weighing only 8738.065 M. Tons was received. The price calculated for the short supply came at Rs.1,87,
460. A report to that effect was made to the relevant authorities and departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the authorised officer. He was served with a show‑cause notice and proceeded against under section 6(3) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. The petitioner submitted his explanation, he was afforded an opportunity of being heard which he did not avail and ultimately the authorised officer vide his order, dated 3‑2‑1985 imposed a penalty of Rs.1,96,154.10 and as well passed his dismissal order. The petitioner had already deposited an amount of Rs.94,952.45 .towards the penalty. He filed a departmental appeal which was dismissed and so was his appeal before the Service Tribunal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in detail and the relevant provisions of the rules also gone through and we are of the view that the procedure adopted by the Authority in doing away with the services of the petitioner and imposing order penalty is strictly in accordance with the law. The Tribunal was thus justified in dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. No ground has been made out for interference by us. The petition is dismissed. M.I. Petition dismissed.