1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Altaf Muhammad Khan for A.‑G. Punjab for Respondents. Khalil Ramday, A.‑G. on 19‑3‑1988 for Respondents. Dates of hearing: 14th and 19th March, 1988. Facts necessary for the disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioner was at the relevant time serving the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, as a Professor when he was allowed to proceed on deputation (foreign service), University of Garyounis, Benghazi, Libya for a period of one year w.e.f. 28‑12‑1978 (R‑III). He was granted two successive extensions, each of one year i.e. upto 28‑12‑1981. Before the expiry of the extended deputation period, petitioner sent an application to the Vice‑Chancellor of the University on 20‑8‑1981 requesting for further extension for a period of two years. Deputy Registrar of the University by letter dated 19‑9‑1981 (Annex‑B) informed the petitioner that in view of the decision of the Syndicate taken in its meeting held on 21‑5‑1977 (Annex B) deputation to a foreign country for more than three years was not permissible and as such further extension could not possibly be granted. Petitioner repeated his request on 17‑11‑1981 (Annex. C) on the premises that the Syndicate in its meeting held on 24‑5‑1979 had prescribed new rules (Annex. A) for the deputation whereunder an employee on deputation in foreign country could be given extension upto a maximum period of five years. This request of the petitioner was turned down by the University Authorities. Since the petitioner had failed to resume his duties in the University, he was proceeded against departmentally and finally compulsorily retired by order dated 15‑4‑1984 (Annex. Z) passed by the Syndicate.

2. Feeling aggrieved, with the aforementioned order of his compulsory retirement, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Chancellor of the University (Annex AA). The appeal, it appears, was processed by the Secretary, Agriculture who vide his note dated 20‑1‑1985 recommended that "the major penalty of compulsory retirement imposed by the Syndicate may stand and the appeal of Dr. Waheed Ahmad under section 42 of the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad Act 1973 may be turned down." This recommendation was agreed to by the Minister for Agriculture and finally the matter was placed before the Governor/Chancellor who, too, agreed with the recommendation of the Secretary and the Minister. Order in fact was recorded by the Secretary to the Governor Punjab on 5‑2‑1985 in the following words:‑ "The Governor has seen and has observed as under:‑ "I agree."

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The sole point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing before the Chancellor and his appeal has been dismissed on office noting. Learned Advocate‑General states that the appellate authority shall now pass a fresh order after granting hearing to the petitioner. In view of the statement made by the learned Advocate‑General, this writ petition succeeds to the extent that the impugned order of the Chancellor dismissing the petitioner's appeal is set aside with the result that) the petitioner's appeal shall be deemed to be pending which the Chancellor shall decide afresh, of course, after hearing the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. S.Q/W‑31/L Order accordingly.