1989 PLP 1319 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SARWAR BUTT Petitioner Versus Dr. RAFIUDDIN and others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1319 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SARWAR BUTT Petitioner Versus Dr. RAFIUDDIN and others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1319 (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 1319 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1319 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SARWAR BUTT Petitioner Versus Dr. RAFIUDDIN and others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Bashir Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Asim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 22nd February, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 1‑11‑1982 of the Punjab Service Tribunal in Service Appeal No.677 of 1981). ‑‑‑Art.212(3)‑‑Removal from service‑‑Contention that officer who removed the civil servant was not competent to remove him and that said officer was prejudiced against him, was not substantiated by relevant material and Rules‑ Petition for leave to appeal against order of removal was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑The petitioner was serving as a laboratory attendant in the Mayo Hospital, Lahore. On the evening of 20‑4‑1981 he was stated to have misbehaved with Dr. Muhammad All Chattha when he not only refused to take the blood of a serious patient for immediate investigation but also insulted the said doctor. He was served with a charge‑sheet and after a regular inquiry in which he refused to participate he was removed from service by the Deputy Medical Superintendent. He filed an appeal before the Medical Superintendent but failed. He then filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal. This too was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that the Deputy Medical Superintendent was not competent to remove him from service and that in any event the said officer was prejudiced against him. When asked to substantiate his contention by reference to relevant rules and material, the learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to do so. This petition is accordingly dismissed. M.B.A./M‑878/S Petition dismissed.