2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ASHFAQ AHMAD Versus E.D.O. (EDUCATION)
| Citation | 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Shakirullah Jan and Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | ASHFAQ AHMAD Versus E.D.O. (EDUCATION) |
| Primary Law | Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Shakirullah Jan and Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ASHFAQ AHMAD Versus E.D.O. (EDUCATION)). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
- Raja Saeed Akram, A.A.-G., Punjab for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 13th September, 2006.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 27-12-2005 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal in Appeal No.1379 of 2005).
S. 3
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212
Penalty of stoppage of two increments, imposed on appellant was enhanced by Appellate Authority to that of termination/removal from service, without any notice of hearing to him
Service Tribunal maintained said enhancement
Judgment of the Service Tribunal as well as order of Appellate Authority were set aside by Supreme Court and case was sent back to the Appellate Authority, where appeal would be deemed to be pending for decision in accordance with law after giving notice to the appellant with an opportunity of hearing him within specified period.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN SHAKIRULLAH JAN, J.
The only contention raised and pressed before us that the Appellate Authority (departmental) while considering the appeal of the appellant, against the penalty of the recovery of salaries of a Naib Qasid received by him and also the penalty of stoppage of two increments, has enhanced it to that of termination/removal him from service without any notice or hearing him in respect of the enhancement of the punishment.
2. The learned A.A.-G. could not controvert the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. Being so (the punishment was enhanced by the Appellate Authority) without notice to him, the order is not sustainable and similarly that of the Service Tribunal too, while maintaining it. Resultantly, while accepting this appeal, the judgment of the Service Tribunal as well as order of the Appellate Authority are set aside and the case is sent back to the Appellate Authority (department), where the appeal will be deemed pending, to decide it in accordance with law after giving notice to the appellant with an opportunity of hearing him, within one month after the receipt of the instant order. H.B.T./A-8/SC Order accordingly.