1989 PLP 1727(1) (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD RIAZ Petitioner Versus WAPDA and 2 others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1727(1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RIAZ Petitioner Versus WAPDA and 2 others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1727(1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1727(1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1727(1) (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD RIAZ Petitioner Versus WAPDA and 2 others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 23rd May, 1989.
- Syed Laqa Haider Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz,
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated, 18‑4‑1988 in Appeal No.173‑(L)/83/270‑R‑87). ‑Art.212(3)‑‑Dismissal for misconduct‑‑Petitioner was charged with serious misconduct bordering on criminal offences‑‑Service Tribunal relied on material against petitioner (including his admission that he had received illegal gratification for another person) and came to the conclusion that charge against petitioner was fully established‑‑Petition was dismissed as no question of law of public importance was involved in the case. Syed Laqa Haider Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz,
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought; against the dismissal by the Federal Service Tribunal; of petitioner s appeal against dismissal from service on the ground of misconduct. The petitioner was charged with ‑serious misconduct bordering on criminal offences. The learned Members of the Tribunals relying on the material against him including an admission made by him of having received the amount 700 which was alleged to have been paid to him as illegal gratification for of another person came to the conclusion that the charge was fully established against him. After hearing the learned counsel in support of this petition we do not find any question of law of public importance in this case. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused. M.B.A./M‑919/S Petition dismissed.