2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Director (E.E.), Lahore Division, Lahore and others Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL
| Citation | 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Director (E.E.), Lahore Division, Lahore and others Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL |
| Primary Law | (a) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), (c) Civil service, (b) Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), (c) Civil service, (b) Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Director (E.E.), Lahore Division, Lahore and others Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aziz Ahmad Chughtai, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao M. Yusuf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 29th April, 2003.
- 3. It is mainly contended by Mr. Aziz Ahmad Chaughtai, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner that the learned Service Tribunal has not appreciated the legal and factual aspects of the controversy in its true perspective which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice. It is next contended that the respondent got his appointment on the basis of a fake and bogus appointment letter which aspect of the matter has been ignored without any cogent reasoning. It is also contended that the appointment of the respondent was never made in accordance with the prescribed procedure and merit was not kept in view.
- 4. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of the petitioner in the light of relevant provision of law and record of the case. We have perused the judgment impugned carefully. After having gone through the entire record we are of the view that it does not support the view point as canvassed at the bar by learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner. No evidence worth the name could be led to support the accusation that the appointment of the respondent was bogus and procured by exerting political pressure. No regular inquiry was held to unveil the reality. The haphazard probe and its result by not following the prescribed procedure as enumerated in the Punjab Civil Service (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 cannot be equated to that of inquiry and would have no legal significance at all. There is no denying the fact that the respondent possessed the requisite qualification prescribed for appointment as PTC teacher and District Education Officer by whom his appointment was made was competent to make such appointment at the recommendations of Tehsil Recruitment Committee. The respondent was dismissed from service after having rendered about six years service without affording him proper opportunity of hearing and completion of mandatory formalities as envisaged in the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 thereby causing a serious prejudice against the respondent which resulted in grave miscarriage of justice. The dismissal of respondent from service smacks of mala fides and perhaps some other blue-eyed chap is required to be accommodated. The bureaucracy should be courageous enough to disobey illegal orders irrespective of the fact is who including politicians/MNAs/MPAs having no authority to pass such order or give such arbitrary directions so that no illegal appointment could be made in oblivion of law and under political influence or for any other extraneous considerations.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 27-3-2001 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, passed in Appeal No.935 of 2000).
S.4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
Appointment of civil servant after six years was alleged to be bogus and procured by exerting political pressure
Civil servant was dismissed from service on such allegation
Service Tribunal accepted civil servant's appeal
No evidence had been led to support such accusation
No regular inquiry had been made to unveil reality
Civil servant possessing requisite qualification for appointment as PTC Teacher Competent Authority had made such appointment at recommendations Tehsil Recruitment Committee
Civil servant had been dismissed from service after having rendered six years' service without affording opportunity of hearing and completion of mandatory formalities as envisaged to Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 causing him serious prejudice and resulting in grave miscarriage of justice
Such dismissal smacked of mala fides
Impugned judgment being well-reasoned did not warrant interference
Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused to grant leave to appeal.
Rr. 5, 6 & 7
Regular inquiry and haphazard probe
Distinction and effect
Haphazard probe and its result without following prescribed procedure as enumerated in Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 could not be equated to that of inquiry and would have no significance at all.
Illegal order and arbitrary direction issued by person having no authority
Duty of bureaucracy to disobey such order and direction-- Emphasized. Bureaucracy should be courageous enough to disobey illegal orders irrespective of the fact, who had issued them including politicians/MNAs/ MPAs having no authority to pass such order or give such arbitrary directions, so that no illegal appointment could be made in contravention of law and under political influence or for any other extraneous considerations.
Judgment & Decree
JAVED IQBAL, J.
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27-3-2001 passed by learned Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appeal preferred on behalf of Muhammad Afzal (respondent) has been accepted by setting aside the order dated 4-10-1999 whereby the respondent was dismissed from service.
2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as PTC teacher on 28-10-1993 at the recommendations of Tehsil Recruitment Committee Sheikhupura. After lapse of about six years disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent on the allegation that his appointment was bogus which culminated into his dismissal from service. After exhausting departmental remedies the respondent approached the Punjab Service Tribunal by means of appeal which has been accepted, hence this petition.
3. It is mainly contended by Mr. Aziz Ahmad Chaughtai, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner that the learned Service Tribunal has not appreciated the legal and factual aspects of the controversy in its true perspective which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice. It is next contended that the respondent got his appointment on the basis of a fake and bogus appointment letter which aspect of the matter has been ignored without any cogent reasoning. It is also contended that the appointment of the respondent was never made in accordance with the prescribed procedure and merit was not kept in view.
4. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of the petitioner in the light of relevant provision of law and record of the case. We have perused the judgment impugned carefully. After having gone through the entire record we are of the view that it does not support the view point as canvassed at the bar by learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner. No evidence worth the name could be led to support the accusation that the appointment of the respondent was bogus and procured by exerting political pressure. No regular inquiry was held to unveil the reality. The haphazard probe and its result by not following the prescribed procedure as enumerated in the Punjab Civil Service (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 cannot be equated to that of inquiry and would have no legal significance at all. There is no denying the fact that the respondent possessed the requisite qualification prescribed for appointment as PTC teacher and District Education Officer by whom his appointment was made was competent to make such appointment at the recommendations of Tehsil Recruitment Committee. The respondent was dismissed from service after having rendered about six years service without affording him proper opportunity of hearing and completion of mandatory formalities as envisaged in the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 thereby causing a serious prejudice against the respondent which resulted in grave miscarriage of justice. The dismissal of respondent from service smacks of mala fides and perhaps some other blue-eyed chap is required to be accommodated. The bureaucracy should be courageous enough to disobey illegal orders irrespective of the fact is who including politicians/MNAs/MPAs having no authority to pass such order or give such arbitrary directions so that no illegal appointment could be made in oblivion of law and under political influence or for any other extraneous considerations.
5. The conclusion as arrived at by the learned Service Tribunal being well-reasoned does Trot warrant any interference. Besides that no question of law of public importance is involved in the matter on the basis whereof leave could be granted. The petition being devoid of merit is dismissed and leave refused. S.A.K.//P-107/S Leave refused.