2025 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ISHTIAQ ANWAR Versus The INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE SINDH and others
| Citation | 2025 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irfan Saadat Khan and Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | ISHTIAQ ANWAR Versus The INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE SINDH and others |
| Primary Law | Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2025 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2025 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irfan Saadat Khan and Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2025 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ISHTIAQ ANWAR Versus The INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE SINDH and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Suresh Kumar, Additional Advocate General, Sindh and Ms. Lubna Pervez, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 25th March, 2025.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated 26.10.2022 passed by Sindh Service Tribunal Karachi in Appeal No. 1017 of 2019).
S. 4
Regular inquiry, dispensing of
Petitioner / civil servant assailed dismissal of his appeal by Service Tribunal, whereby order of his compulsory retirement from service was maintained
Plea raised by petitioner / civil servant was that he used to be on outdoor duty
Plea was in itself an admission on the part of petitioner / civil servant of coming late without intimation, particularly in view of the fact that attendance sheet was placed on record which revealed that whenever he was on outdoor duty it was marked as "Out Working"
In the order in question it had been discussed as to how he put his attendance in bio-metric record though he was not on duty
Supreme Court declined to interfere in finding of Service Tribunal that documentary evidence was such that there was no need to hold an inquiry under the relevant law i.e. Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, J.
This petition has arisen out of an order of the Sindh Service Tribunal Karachi in terms whereof petitioner was compulsory retired from service as being a habitual late comer and absentee. The documentary evidence against the appellant in that regard was well discussed in the impugned order. The appellant used to come late in the office and the plea that he had taken is that he had to arrange certain official events because of which he used to come late. This explanation itself goes against him in view of the fact that had this been the situation he could have sought such exemption or at least exemption of coming on time on the specific dates when the events were arranged, which he has not done. Therefore, this plea is in itself an admission on the part of the petitioner of coming late without intimation, particularly in view of the fact that the attendance sheet was placed on record which revealed that whenever the appellant was on outdoor duty it was marked as "Out Working". It is also well discussed in the impugned order as to how he has put his attendance in the bio-metric record though he was not on duty. In these circumstances, we are in agreement with the finding of the Tribunal that the documentary evidence was such that there was no need to hold an inquiry under the law i.e. Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000. We also do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Tribunal. It is hereby upheld. Leave is refused and petition stands dismissed. MH/I-6/SC Petition dismissed.