1990 PLP 925 (SCMR)
Present: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARIE, MULTAN and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 925 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | Present: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARIE, MULTAN and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 925 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 925 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 925 (SCMR) (Present: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARIE, MULTAN and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 2nd August, 1989.
- Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for the Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 4‑3‑1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, passed in Appeal No. 838 of 1985). ‑‑‑‑S. 4‑‑‑Constitution, of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Dismissal from service‑‑ Leave to appeal‑‑‑Departmental Authorities after holding enquiry and affording petitioner opportunity of being heard, dismissed petitioner from service on allegation that petitioner at time of joining service had misstated her age and had produced a forged certificate in respect of her date of birth‑‑‑Service Tribunal after examining record found that allegation against petitioner had been established‑‑‑Finding of fact recorded by Authorities and upheld by Service Tribunal was not suffering from any infirmity‑‑‑Petitioner having rightly been dismissed, petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for the Petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for the Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 2nd August, 1989. SAAD SAOOD JAN J.‑‑‑The petitioner was employed as an Auxiliary worker in the Social Welfare Directorate. The Directorate found that at the time of joining service she had misstated her age and had produced a forged certificate in respect of her date of birth. It served a show‑cause notice upon her and after giving her an opportunity to explain her position, dismissed her from service. She fled an appeal before the Deputy Director but it was dismissed. She then filed an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. This too failed. She now seeks leave to appeal from this Court. After examining the record the Service Tribunal had found that at the time of seeking employment in the Directorate the petitioner had made a misstatement about her age. This is a finding of fact. The learned counsel appearing on her behalf has not been able to pursuade us that this finding suffers from any infirmity. Once it is established that she had obtained the employment through misrepresentation it was open to the Directorate to terminate it. This A petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. H.B.T./R‑126/S Petition dismissed.