1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
GHULAM SARWAR and another Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, JHANG and another
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Abdul Hamid Khan, Member |
| Parties | GHULAM SARWAR and another Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, JHANG and another |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Abdul Hamid Khan, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GHULAM SARWAR and another Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, JHANG and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Iqbal for Appellants.
- Ch. Manzoor Hussain D.A. for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 29th September, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
Major penalty of reversion was imposed on civil servant by Authority despite the fact that Enquiry Officer had submitted his findings to Authorised Officer with observation that prosecution accusing civil servants of illegal gratification had failed to prove charges levelled against them-- Authorised officer did not agree with Enquiry Officer and found civil servants guilty of gross misconduct and recommended to Authority imposition of major penalty
Authority accepted recommendations of Authorised Officer and imposed penalty of reduction of rank on civil servants
Authorised Officer before forwarding his recommendations to Authority, admittedly did not give any opportunity to civil servants to show cause against recommendations regarding penalty to be imposed on them which had prejudiced them in preparation of their defence as they were not aware of findings of Enquiry Officer at prescribed stage and of action proposed to be taken against them-- Even on merit no credible evidence was on record to sustain orders against civil servants
Case against civil servants admittedly having not been established, orders passed by Authority against civil servants were set aside and they were reinstated with all benefits.
Judgment & Decree
Appeals Nos. 969 and 970 of 1987, decided on 3rd January, 1991.
Major penalty of reversion was imposed on civil servant by Authority despite the fact that Enquiry Officer had submitted his findings to Authorised Officer with observation that prosecution accusing civil servants of illegal gratification had failed to prove charges levelled against them-- Authorised officer did not agree with Enquiry Officer and found civil servants guilty of gross misconduct and recommended to Authority imposition of major penalty
Authority accepted recommendations of Authorised Officer and imposed penalty of reduction of rank on civil servants
Authorised Officer before forwarding his recommendations to Authority, admittedly did not give any opportunity to civil servants to show cause against recommendations regarding penalty to be imposed on them which had prejudiced them in preparation of their defence as they were not aware of findings of Enquiry Officer at prescribed stage and of action proposed to be taken against them-- Even on merit no credible evidence was on record to sustain orders against civil servants
Case against civil servants admittedly having not been established, orders passed by Authority against civil servants were set aside and they were reinstated with all benefits. Muhammad Iqbal for Appellants. Ch. Manzoor Hussain D.A. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 29th September, 1990.