1990 PLP 538 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD YOUSAF QURESHI-‑Petitioner Versus THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 538 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilhash, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YOUSAF QURESHI-‑Petitioner Versus THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 538 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 538 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilhash, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 538 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD YOUSAF QURESHI-‑Petitioner Versus THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hamid Aslam Oureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal passed in case No. 353/179 of 1985 on 2‑1‑1986). ‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Dismissal from service for misconduct‑‑‑Civil servant's contention was that in the enquiry held by Departmental Authorities, he was not a party and thus had no opportunity to defend himself; nevertheless, Authority who passed the order of dismissal had used the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer, in dismissing him; order of dismissal thus violated the principle of natural justice‑‑ Contention needed examination‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Dismissal from service for misconduct‑‑‑Civil servant's contention was that in the enquiry held by Departmental Authorities, he was not a party and thus had no opportunity to defend himself; nevertheless, Authority who passed the order of dismissal had used the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer, in dismissing him; order of dismissal thus violated the principle of natural justice‑‑ Contention needed examination‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted. Hamid Aslam Oureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1988. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑The petitioner was a Stamper in the District Treasury Office at Lahore. There was a defalcation of Rs.14,58,402 in the treasury. As a result, criminal as well as departmental proceedings., were taken against the petitioner and other employees in the treasury. Consequent upon the disciplinary proceedings against the peitioner he was dismissed from service. He filed an appeal before the Commissioner but it was dismissed. He then approached the Service Tribunal but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that in the inquiry held‑ by the departmental authorities he was not a party and as such he had no opportunity to defend himself; nevertheless, the Deputy Commissioner who passed the order of dismissal has used the findings recorded by the inquiry officer in dismissing him from service. That being so, the order of dismissal violated the principle of natural justice.
3. The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.500. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. A.A./M‑958/S Leave granted.