1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD KHALID KHAN Versus INSPECTOR‑GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB AND OTHERS
| Citation | 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman and One Member |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD KHALID KHAN Versus INSPECTOR‑GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB AND OTHERS |
| Primary Law | Civil service‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman and One Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD KHALID KHAN Versus INSPECTOR‑GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB AND OTHERS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Asghar for Appellant.
- H. R. Cheema, Government Pleader for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑-Disciplinary action--Show‑cause notice addressed in wrong name and returned with postal endorsement that no person of that name available‑‑-No valid service of notice-‑ Personal hearing mandatory under rules also not afforded‑-‑Consequential order set aside and case remanded for proceeding afresh in accordance with rules‑Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4.
Judgment & Decree
Appeal No. 237 of 1979; decided on 30th September, 1980. ‑‑-Disciplinary action--Show‑cause notice addressed in wrong name and returned with postal endorsement that no person of that name available‑‑-No valid service of notice-‑ Personal hearing mandatory under rules also not afforded‑-‑Consequential order set aside and case remanded for proceeding afresh in accordance with rules‑Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S.
4. Ghulam Asghar for Appellant. H. R. Cheema, Government Pleader for Respondent. M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).--In this case the appellant con tends that the show‑cause notice was sent to him in the name of Khalid Mahmood which was received back with the postal endorsement that there was no person of this name available at the relevant address. The appellant submits that according to. Government record, the name was Muhammad Khalid Khan. Thus the postal endorsement in question could not be treated as valid for the purposes of service of show‑cause notice on the appellant. It was also contended that the D. I. G. did not grant him the personal hearing nor was he summoned to appear before him which) was a clear violation of the Punjab Police (E & D) Rules, 1975. Both the contentions have not been denied by the Department. In the circumstances we are of the view that the proceedings against the appellant were not in accordance with law. We, accordingly, accept this appeal and set aside the orders of the departmental authorities and remand tae case to S. P., Multan, to proceed afresh in accordance with the provisions of law. Appeal accepted.