1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
SHAHID-UL-QAYYUM and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Economic Affairs and Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others
| Citation | 1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Zia Mahmood Mirza and Irshad Hasan Khan, JJ |
| Parties | SHAHID-UL-QAYYUM and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Economic Affairs and Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Zia Mahmood Mirza and Irshad Hasan Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (SHAHID-UL-QAYYUM and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Economic Affairs and Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on-Record for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 446 of 1994).
- Nemo for Respondents (in both Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 12th March, 1995.
- Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 446 of 1994).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, dated 12-6-1994 passed in Appeal No. 51(R) of 1994).
Art. 212(3)
Major penalty of reduction to lowest post for period of three years and minor penalties of censure, withholding of next annual increment for period of three years and recovery of loss of store items was imposed upon civil servant by Departmental Authority -Service Tribunal, however, modified order in question, so as to reduce penalties to that of stoppage of two increments for period of two years with cumulative effect
Petitioner contended that Service Tribunal having found that air-conditioner (item of store which was deemed to have been lost) purchased by, petitioner was installed in office and, therefore, only fault of petitioner was that he did not obtain written approval of officer under whose directions said air-conditioner was purchased and that it was not proved whether petitioner was directly responsible for shortage in store items and no valid basis for awarding any penalty to petitioner thus existed
Petitioner's further contention was that because of finding of Service Tribunal, petitioner was not allowed to cross-examine witnesses, thus, inquiry stood vitiated with the result that it could not form basis of any penal action against petitioner-- Leave to appeal was granted to consider contentions raised
Leave to appeal was also granted in connected appeal filed by Government against petitioner against reduction of his penalty by Service Tribunal. Petitioner in person (in C.P. No. 405 of 1994).
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner in person (in C.P. No. 405 of 1994). Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 446 of 1994). Nemo for Respondents (in both Petitions). Date of hearing: 12th March, 1995. ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J: ‑‑The abovementioned two petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal dated 12‑6‑1994 whereby order of the departmental authority imposing on the petitioner Shahid ul Qayyum major penalty of reduction to the lower post of Assistant Incharge for a period of three years and minor penalties of censure, withholding of next annual increment for a period of 3 years and recovery of loss of store items has been modified so as to reduce the penalties to "that of `stoppage of two increments' for the period of 2 years with cumulative effect".
2. Learned counsel appearing in support of C.P. No.405 of 1994 contends that the Service Tribunal having found that the air‑conditioner purchased by the petitioner was installed in the office and, therefore, the only fault of the petitioner was that "he did not obtain written approval of the officer under whose directions, the A.C. was purchased" and that it was not proved whether the petitioner was directly responsible for the shortage of store, there was no valid basis/justification for awarding any penalty to the petitioner. It is further contended that in view of the finding of the, Service Tribunal that the petitioner was not allowed to cross‑examine the witnesses, the inquiry stood vitiated with the result that it could not form the basis of any penal action against the petitioner. Contentions raised need consideration and leave is accordingly granted in C.P. 405 of 1994.
3. Leave is also granted in the connected petition (C:P. No.446 of 1994) filed by Federation of Pakistan as the judgment impugned therein is the same which forms the subject‑matter of C.P.No.405 of 1994. AA./S‑976/S Leave granted.