SCMR 1988

1988 PLP 1922 (SCMR)

Malik AHMAD NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus WAPDA — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Petitions Nos.13-Q and 31-R of 1987, decided on 2nd June, 1988.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1988 PLP 1922 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ
Parties Malik AHMAD NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus WAPDA — Respondent
Primary Law (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1922 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1922 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1922 (SCMR) (Malik AHMAD NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus WAPDA — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) (b) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)

Representation

  • Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate-on-Record and S.A.M. Quadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No.13-Q of 1987).
  • Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent (in C . P. No.13-Q of 1987) .
  • Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C . P. No. 31-R of 1987) .
  • S.A.M. Quadri, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent (in C.P. No.31-R of 1987).
  • Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1988.
  • Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate‑on‑Record and S.A.M. Quadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No.13‑Q of 1987).
  • Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in C . P. No.13‑Q of 1987) .
  • Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in C . P. No. 31‑R of 1987) .
  • S.A.M. Quadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in C.P. No.31‑R of 1987).

Headnotes / Summary

(From the judgment/order of Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, dated 14-12-1986 in Appeal No.3-Q of 1983).

Art.212(3)--Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S.4- Misreading of evidence-- Removal from service on charges of misconduct--Service Tribunal in appeal upheld charges but reduced punishment to retirement from service--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention that on reference to documentary evidence on record, allegations of misconduct against petitioner would be found incorrect.

S. 4--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)--Misreading of evidence-- Limitation--Time-barred appeal--Reduction of sentence by Service Tribunal, challenged-- Leave to appeal granted to consider contention that Service Tribunal wrongly condoned delay in filing of appeal without adverting to relevant evidence on record and that charges being proved against accused employee Service Tribunal had erred in reducing penalty imposed upon him.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a second round of litigation before this Court, the first one having been brought by WAPDA, petitioner in C.P.L.A. No.31‑R of 1987 and respondent in C.P.L.A. No.13‑Q of 1987, which was decided by this Court in Civil Appeal No.803 of 1984 with a result that the case was remanded to the Service Tribunal with certain directions contained in the judgment dated 10‑12‑1985. On remand of the case, the Service Tribunal condoned the delay in the filing of the appeal of Malik Ahmad Nawaz, petitioner in C.P.L.A. No.13‑Q of 1987 and respondent in C.P.L.A. No.31‑R of 1987, but upheld the order passed against him, with modification that his removal from service was altered to his retirement from service, and with this modification his appeal was otherwise dismissed. On merits of the case the Service Tribunal upheld the charge against him that as a "Line Superintendent" he was interfering with the affairs of other formations, in that, he removed the old meter from the premises of M/s. Noor Band Wood Factory on 9‑5‑1982, when he was working in some other formation, and had no business of removing or replacing the meter and he thus allowed the consumer to utilize the electricity direct without any meter etc. Mr. Iftikhar Muhammad, learned counsel appearing in support of C.P.L.A.No.13‑Q of 1987 submits with reference to the documentary evidence on record that petitioner had visited the premises under the directions of his superior officer, and removed the meter, and it is also totally an incorrect allegation that the consumer used the electricity without any electric consumption charges because he was directed to pay the fixed charges under the Rules which indeed were debited to his account. Mr. Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, learned counsel appearing in support of C . P. L. A . No.31‑R of 1987, on the contrary, submits, that the Service Tribunal has wrongly condoned the delay in the filing of the appeal, without adverting to the relevant evidence on record, and that the finding of the Tribunal with regard to the unauthorized removal of the meter is well supported by the record. Learned counsel further submit that on the charges proved against Malik Ahmad Nawas the Service Tribunal erred in reducing the penalty imposed upon him. We find that the pleas raised in support of both petitions deserve consideration. We, therefore, grant leave to appeal in both petitions. Appeals shall be heard together on the present records, but it is :open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. By consent the next hearing of the appeals is fixed at Karachi in November 1988, and ire case there is no sitting of the Court in the month, then during the session immediately thereafter. M.I./A‑290/S Leave granted.