PLC(CS) 1992

1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

YOUSUF JAMAL Versus DIRECTOR FOOD, PUNJAB, LAHORE

Jurisdiction / Court
Service Tribunal Punjab
Decided Date
Appeal No. 586/1074 of 1988, decided on 31st January, 1990.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Forum / Court Service Tribunal Punjab
Bench Members Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member
Parties YOUSUF JAMAL Versus DIRECTOR FOOD, PUNJAB, LAHORE
Primary Law Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?

The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (YOUSUF JAMAL Versus DIRECTOR FOOD, PUNJAB, LAHORE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975

Representation

  • Muhammad Yasin Bhatti for Appellant.
  • A.G. Humayun, D.A. for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

R.5(1)

Departmental proceedings

Deputy Director Food Department, who was authority in case of civil servant against whom departmental proceedings were conducted, ordered departmental proceedings against civil servant and without directing authorised officer to proceed against him, himself conducted departmental proceedings

Proceedings conducted by Deputy Director were against scheme provided under R. 5(1) of Rules, 1975 according to which Deputy Director should have appointed an Authorised Officer and then directed him to proceed against civil servant

Deputy Director himself could not assume powers of Authorised Officer without specific and proper delegation of such powers to him

Order of Deputy Director, being void and without jurisdiction was set aside and likewise order passed in appeal against aggrieved civil servant by Director Food was also set aside by Tribunal.

Judgment & Decree

Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975

R.5(1)

Departmental proceedings

Deputy Director Food Department, who was authority in case of civil servant against whom departmental proceedings were conducted, ordered departmental proceedings against civil servant and without directing authorised officer to proceed against him, himself conducted departmental proceedings

Proceedings conducted by Deputy Director were against scheme provided under R. 5(1) of Rules, 1975 according to which Deputy Director should have appointed an Authorised Officer and then directed him to proceed against civil servant

Deputy Director himself could not assume powers of Authorised Officer without specific and proper delegation of such powers to him

Order of Deputy Director, being void and without jurisdiction was set aside and likewise order passed in appeal against aggrieved civil servant by Director Food was also set aside by Tribunal. Muhammad Yasin Bhatti for Appellant. A.G. Humayun, D.A. for Respondents.