2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ABDUL QAYYUM Versus GUJRANWALA ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY LIMITED through Chief Executive Gujranwala and 3 others
| Citation | 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Moazzam Hayat and Jehan Zaib Burki, Members |
| Parties | ABDUL QAYYUM Versus GUJRANWALA ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY LIMITED through Chief Executive Gujranwala and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (XVII of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 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 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Moazzam Hayat and Jehan Zaib Burki, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ABDUL QAYYUM Versus GUJRANWALA ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY LIMITED through Chief Executive Gujranwala and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Jaffar Hussain for Appellant.
- Muhammad Iqbal Khokhar for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 9th June, 2006.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 3, 5, 6, 11 & 12-Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4
Awarding penalty of compulsory retirement from service
Letter for explanation was issued to the appellant under Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978 wherein charge was levelled against appellant to the effect that he had received illegal gratification from a person for giving him electric connection for his tube-well
Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 having come into force at relevant time, department could not proceed against appellant under Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978 as the Ordinance had overridden all other disciplinary laws including the said Rules
Action against appellant, was not legal and penalty imposed on him could not be maintained
Department should have proceeded against the appellant under Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000.
Judgment & Decree
MOAZZAM HAYAT (MEMBER).
Appellant Abdul Qayyum, L.S. Grade I in Pasrur Sub-Division under GEPCO was awarded penalty of compulsory retirement from service vide order, dated 31-1-2001. His departmental appeal was rejected on 4-10-2001. It is prayed by him that the orders dated 31-3-2001 and 4-10-2001 be set aside and he be reinstated into service with back benefits.
2. The appeal is resisted by the respondents. It is stated that the impugned order was passed strictly in accordance with the rules.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The record has also been perused by us.
4. A letter of explanation was issued to the appellant on 1-1-2001 under the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978. In this letter the charge levelled against the appellant was that he has received illegal gratification from one Tahir-ul-Haq Dar for giving him electric connection for his tube-well.
5. As the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 had come into force in May, 2000, therefore, the respondents could not proceed against the appellant under the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978. The Ordinance has overriden all other disciplinary laws including the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978. In this regard reference is made to sections 11 and 12 of the Ordinance. In the circumstances we are constrained to hold that action taken against the appellant was not legal. The penalty imposed on the appellant under the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978 cannot be sustained. The respondents should have proceeded against the appellant under the Removal form Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000.
6. For the above reasons we accept the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The appellant is reinstated into service subject to the condition that he shall refund the pensionary benefits, if he has received any in accordance with the rules. On reinstatement he shall be proceeded against the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000.
7. There shall be no order as to costs. The parties shall be informed. H.B.T./76/FST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal accepted.