2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and others Versus RAFIQUE AHMED AGHA
| Citation | 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ |
| Parties | GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and others Versus RAFIQUE AHMED AGHA |
| Primary Law | Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and others Versus RAFIQUE AHMED AGHA). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, Addl. A.-G., Sindh, Karachi and Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- 2. Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh submitted that the Service Tribunal exonerated the respondent of the charges levelled against him and set aside penalty, of dismissal by ignoring very material and important factual and legal aspects of the case and the judgment suffers from grave illegality. He pointed out that the Tribunal has ignored material portion of the report of the Inquiry Committee and referred to paragraph 29 of the report and submitted that after perusal it would be sufficiently clear that respondent Agha Rafique Ahmad had acted in negligent and careless manner and had allowed illegal removal of the wheat from the store which was in his charge. His second submission was that the Tribunal had failed to take into consideration the fact that inquiry was conducted jointly against four officers, one of which namely Ghulam Nabi, was an Officer in BPS-18 and in respect of Officer of BPS-18 of the relevant department acts as an Authorized Officer. Therefore, the matter was referred to the Secretary in a capacity as Authorized Officer, who was also authority in respect of the other three Officers including respondent Agha Rafique Ahmad.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 4-1-2007 passed by the Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi in Appeal No.40 of 2000).
R. 4(1)(b)(iv)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.212(3)
Authority had filed petition for leave to appeal against judgment of the Service Tribunal whereby penalty of dismissal from service awarded to respondent was set aside and he was ordered to be reinstated in service
Contention of Authority was that Service Tribunal had exonerated respondent of the charges levelled against him and set aide penalty of dismissal from service by ignoring very material, important factual and legal aspect of the case, and that judgment of the Service Tribunal suffered from grave illegality and that Service Tribunal had ignored material portion of the report of the Inquiry Committee
Authority had also alleged that respondent had acted in negligent and careless manner and had allowed illegal removal of the wheat from the store which was in his charge
Contentions raised by the Authority requiring consideration, leave to appeal was granted to consider said contentions.
Judgment & Decree
SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.
This petition has been filed against the judgment of Sindh Service Tribunal dated 30-12-2006 in Appeal No.40 of 2000 whereby penalty of dismissal awarded to the petitioner under the Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, from service was set aside and he was ordered to be reinstated without back-benefits.
2. Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh submitted that the Service Tribunal exonerated the respondent of the charges levelled against him and set aside penalty, of dismissal by ignoring very material and important factual and legal aspects of the case and the judgment suffers from grave illegality. He pointed out that the Tribunal has ignored material portion of the report of the Inquiry Committee and referred to paragraph 29 of the report and submitted that after perusal it would be sufficiently clear that respondent Agha Rafique Ahmad had acted in negligent and careless manner and had allowed illegal removal of the wheat from the store which was in his charge. His second submission was that the Tribunal had failed to take into consideration the fact that inquiry was conducted jointly against four officers, one of which namely Ghulam Nabi, was an Officer in BPS-18 and in respect of Officer of BPS-18 of the relevant department acts as an Authorized Officer. Therefore, the matter was referred to the Secretary in a capacity as Authorized Officer, who was also authority in respect of the other three Officers including respondent Agha Rafique Ahmad.
3. On consideration of the above arguments, it is observed that both the contentions require consideration. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted to consider, amongst others, the above question. G-14/SC Leave granted.