Termination

2026 PLC(CS) 138 PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL Judicial Precedent

S. 4Civil servantTerminationDisciplinary proceedings, initiation ofShow-Cause Notice, non-issuance ofInquiry, non-holding ofEffect

Appellants, after regularization, continued to discharge their duties without adverse service entries or disciplinary blemishes, but they were summarily terminated through cyclostyled orders, which referred to the departmental directive alleging large-scale irregularities in appointments

Said termination orders were issued without the issuance of Show-Cause Notices, without the framing of precise charges and without initiation of any formal inquiry under Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006

The disciplinary proceedings cannot be sustained on the basis of generalized administrative conclusions or institutional suspicion in the absence of individualized inquiry and concrete evidence

Thus, the impugned disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by serious violations of statutory provisions, due process and principles of natural justice

Punjab Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned orders and reinstated appellants into service while the matter was remanded to the competent authority to conduct de novo inquiry proceedings, strictly in accordance with law

Appeals were allowed accordingly.

2026 PLC(CS) 138 PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL Judicial Precedent

S.4Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 10-ACivil servantTerminationDisciplinary proceedings, initiation ofShow-Cause Notice, non-issuance ofInquiry, non-holding ofEffectRight of fair trialScope

Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006, provides a mandatory procedural framework for imposing disciplinary penalties on civil servants, which mandates the issuance of a charge sheet, appointment of an impartial inquiry officer, the right to defend against allegations, and issuance of a speaking order grounded in evidence, however in the present case, none of said statutory safeguards were observed

Appellants were not served with any charge sheet, no inquiry officer was appointed and no formal inquiry was conducted

The omission to comply with said mandatory procedural requirements constituted a fatal illegality and rendered the entire proceedings null and void

Article 10-A of the Constitution enshrines the right process as an inviolable fundamental right

Thus , the impugned disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by serious violations of statutory provisions, constitutional guarantees, due process and principles of natural justice

Punjab Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned orders and reinstated appellants into service while the matter was remanded to the competent authority to conduct denovo inquiry proceedings, strictly in accordance with law

Appeals were allowed accordingly.

2025 PLC(CS) 446 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR Judicial Precedent

Appointment on contractTerminationScope

Record revealed that the petitioner was initially appointed as Technical Expert Revenue (BS-18) Ehtesab Bureau, on contract basis on the recommendations of Selection Committee for a period of one year ; later on, his contract appointment was extended twice (for period(s) of one year and two years respectively)

Admittedly, the contract appointment of the petitioner was made under Cl. IV(iii) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Contract Appointment Policy, 2006, according to the which (clause), the service of a contract employee could be terminated on one month's notice or on month's pay in lieu thereof, by either side without assigning any reason

Thus, as the petitioner was a temporary/contractual employee in the department as mentioned in his appointment notification his service could be terminated at any time by the competent authority in the light of the said contractual policy

In the present case, the authority removed him after paying one month's salary which was in accordance with the contractual policy, therefore, in view of the above reasoning, he could not be restored in his service

High Court had not committed any illegality by dismissing the writ petition filed by petitioner in limine

No question of law and public importance was involved in the present petition which was a pre-requisite for grant of leave

Leave could not be granted in routine just to create a false hope in the mind of a litigant

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.

2025 PLC 190 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 33 & 58Appeal by or against corporationsForm of appealNon-signing/verification of appealCurable defectFake educational certificatesTermination

After acceptance of grievance petition of employee and his consequential reinstatement, petitioner-Bank preferred an appeal, which was dismissed on technical ground of non-signing the same by only one attorney of the Bank without addressing merits of the case

Validity

Issue of authorization was neither raised at the initial stage of filing nor pointed out by the National Industrial Relations Commission's office

No opportunity was afforded to the Petitioner to rectify the alleged procedural defect

Commission, being a quasi-judicial body vested with the power to regulate its own procedure, was not divested of the jurisdiction to allow correction or supplementation of such formal requirements

Procedural lapses, such as deficiencies in the manner of signing or verifying pleadings, do not, per se, vitiate legal proceedings unless such irregularities result in demonstrable prejudice or impinge upon the fundamental jurisdiction of the adjudicating forum

Defect, being purely technical and rectifiable in nature, ought to have been remedied through appropriate procedural means rather than resorting to outright dismissal

Dismissal of the appeal without issuing notice for rectification, or even call upon the petitioner to furnish a second signature, appeared to be not only hasty, but also disproportionate to the nature of the alleged irregularity

Where a party suffers serious consequences, such as affirmance of reinstatement with back benefits of an employee terminated for alleged submission of fake academic credentials, a higher standard of scrutiny and adjudication on merits is required

Any order, which fails to consider the material issues and evidence was liable to be set aside for non-application of mind

Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances and the matter was remanded to the Commission for decision on merits.

2025 PLC(CS) 1090 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 13(6)(i) & 25AppointmentTerminationDue processScopeCompetent authorityPowers

Petitioner who was appointed in BPS-21 in Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University (SZBMU/University) was aggrieved of his termination by the University

Contention of the counsel for the petitioner was that the impugned notification was issued contrary to law and by an incompetent authority

Validity

SZBMU/University, is a statutory entity established under the Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University Act, 2013, ('the Act 2013')

The Vice-Chancellor is authorized to appoint, on the recommendation of the selection board, employees up to the pay scale equivalent to BPS-18 as enunciated under S. 13(6)(i) of the Act 2013

Furthermore, under S. 25 of the Act 2013, the Syndicate of the University is vested with, inter alia, the authority to appoint, on the recommendations of the Selection Board, officers to pay scale equivalent to BPS-19 and above

The Syndicate is also empowered to determine the terms and conditions of such appointments, including the pay fixation and other related matters

Thus, under provisions of the Act 2013 all appointments at BPS-19 and above, as well as the determination of terms and conditions of service, fall exclusively within the domain of the Syndicate of the University

In the present case, the petitioner was employed in BPS-21; consequently, his appointment, termination and the terms of service unequivocally fall within the purview of the Syndicate of the University, as delineated under the statutory framework of the Act 2013

Thus, it is vividly evident from the record that the said Notification was issued with the prior approval of the Syndicate, which is the competent authority to pass such orders

The impugned notification has been duly issued and the contents thereof demonstrate that the competent authority, the Syndicate, had exercised its authority and determined the employment of the petitioner in the manner permissible under the terms and conditions governing the employment of the petitioner

Petitioner failed to pinpoint any illegality in the impugned notification

Constitutional petition, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstances.

2024 PLC(CS) 985 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Contract appointmentTerminationRe-instatementScope

Relevant clause of appointment letter, stipulated that the offer of appointment was only for a period of 89 days which may be terminable without assigning any reason or might be extended subject to satisfactory performance

Yet another clause revealed that this daily wages employment neither conferred any right of permanent job nor any privilege of regular appointment would be claimed in future whereas another significant clause revealed that the employment could be treated as cancelled in case of non-fulfilment of the prescribed accessories and not appearing for duty on time

Record revealed that the period of work was extended from time to time and ultimately it was discontinued on 13.03.2010 in terms of said clause, however, on application of the petitioner, he was re-appointed on 17.12.2012 under the same terms and conditions of initial appointment letter which too was discontinued on 17.02.2016

Petitioner who, at the time of joining, had accepted all the terms and conditions of his daily wages employment, could not resile from the same at a belated stage

Moreover, it was nowhere mentioned in the appointment letter that it was a job of permanent nature or the same was likely to be permanent in future

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

2015 PLC(CS) 1078 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court Judicial Precedent

Arts. 71 & 81Writ petitionCivil serviceContractual serviceTerminationPetitioner, initially was appointed as Excise and Taxation Officer in BS-17 on contract basis for one year

Period of one year was extended and service of the petitioner was supposed to continue till the recruitment of regular incumbent, however, services of the petitioner, were terminated without issuing him show-cause notice, and without giving him opportunity of hearing

Serious allegations of corruption and misappropriation of government funds, were levelled against the petitioner

No Inquiry Committee, was appointed to probe the said allegations

Reliance was placed by the authorities, on the report submitted by the Chief Minister's Inspection Team, on the basis of which the termination of the petitioner, was ordered

Said report, could not be a substitute for departmental inquiry

Petitioner after his appointment, being entitled to continue his service till any recruitment made by Public Service Commission; a valuable legal right was created in favour of petitioner

Authorities, though were empowered to cancel/rescind the notification, rules, laws and orders, but they could not exercise the power under the principle of 'locus poenitentiae'

Authorities, did not follow the service rules, and failed to provide a fair opportunity to petitioner of being heard and defend the allegations levelled against him

Condemning the petitioner unheard just on the basis of a fact finding report, tantamounted to miscarriage of justice

Impugned order, was set aside with direction that the petitioner be reinstated in his position with back benefits.

2014 PLC 275 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 33(4) & 44(4)(g)Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionTerminationInterim reliefSuspension of termination orderScopeWorkman challenged his termination order before Labour Court through grievance petitionLabour Court, on the application of interim relief filed by workman, suspended the impugned termination order

Employer/petitioner aggrieved by the temporary injunction given by Labour Court filed revision petition before Labour Appellate Tribunal which was also dismissed

Contention of the petitioner/employer was that temporary injunction granted by Labour Court would amount giving of the final relief, therefore the interim relief was not justified

Validity

Interim relief should not be the whole relief that the workman would get if he succeeded finally

Interlocutory order granting a relief of the nature, which would amount to allowing the main case without trial was not justified

Order of Labour Court suspending the order impugned in the main petition could not be termed to have been passed while exercising lawful authority

Impugned orders were set aside

Constitutional petition was allowed.

2014 PLC(CS) 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Rr. 16, 17 & 17-APunjab Employees, Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006), S.16Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionContractual appointmentsTerminationScopeUnemployed children of deceased employeeTerm "Post" in Rr.16 & 17 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointments and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974ConnotationPetitioner's father was a regular employee who died during servicePetitioner was given appointment on contract basis in place of his deceased fatherPetitioner's contractual appointment was terminated on account of absence

Departmental appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed as being contractual employee, he did not have the remedy of departmental appeal

Validity

In case of death of a civil servant, who died during service, one unemployed child of his, was to be appointed against a post

Term "post" provided in the Rr.16 & 17 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974, was referable to the "post", which was being held by the deceased civil servant of the aspiring child for the appointment

Father of the petitioner was a regular employee in education department and his appointment on contract basis was alien to such scheme of law as provided under the R.17-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974

In the present case, the petitioner (child of deceased civil servant) was treated as contract employee and was proceeded against in such capacity and his departmental appeal was also dismissed holding that contract employee had no right of appeal

All actions against the petitioner (child of deceased civil servant), while treating him as an employee on contract basis had lost their efficacy

Petitioner (child of deceased civil servant) was a regular employee and he was to be dealt with on any available disciplinary grounds by giving him a status of regular employee

Punitive actions taken against the petitioner were not sustainable, therefore the impugned order was set aside and the petitioner was ordered to be re-instated in service

Constitutional petition was allowed.

2013 MLD 1323 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.3Limited ownership of femaleTerminationScope

Termination of such ownership of female, under S.3 of West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1948, was to be open at the time of death of last male owner and successors of propositus were entitled to inherit.

2009 CLC 406 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 21, 42 & 56Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.105Easements Act (V of 1882), S.52Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.104 & O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2Interim injunctionAgreement of licenseTerminationPlaintiff was licensee of defendant company and was running business at the premises of defendant

On termination of license, plaintiff resisted his eviction by filing civil suit, wherein Trial Court granted interim injunction in his favour

Validity

Reasonableness of temporary injunction should be judged by principles like prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable loss, conduct of parties, nature of suit, time limit likely to be absolved in it, stakes of parties, workability and reasonableness of order proposed to be passed

Plaintiff failed to make out a case for grant of temporary injunction in his favour, as he was only a license holder on the basis of which, no suit for declaration, injunction or specific performance could be filed and was maintainable

At the most, if plaintiff succeeded in the suit, he could recover damages suffered in consequence of cancellation of agreement or dispossession from property

No irreparable injury was likely to be suffered, which could not be compensated in terms of money

Recovery of damages was declaratory remedy eventually

Prima facie the contract was in the nature of revocable license, the period of which had already expired and remedy available to plaintiff was by way of damages

Plaintiff in the garb of injunction could not seek grant of license, which otherwise would be illegal

Order of interim injunction granted under O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 and 2, C.P.C. by Trial Court was set aside

Appeal was allowed in circumstances.

2008 PTD 1106 FEDERAL-TAX-OMBUDSMAN-PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent

Rr. 4, 5 & 6C.B.R. Circular No. C-2(F)-STP/99/PT, dated 1-1-2002Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss.2(3), 9 & 11Deferring refund claim till deletion of supplier's name from suspected listValidity

Rejection of refund claim would not be justified, where few invoices were found to be fake or issued by suspected supplier

Appropriate course in such cases would be to disallow refund claim, where invoices were found to be fake and sanction amount of genuine invoices without regard to the fact that particular supplier was placed on suspected list

Where purchaser had genuinely paid invoice value inclusive of sales tax through appropriate banking channel, then responsibility of payment of sales tax to Government would lie with registered supplier

Action should be taken against registered supplier in case of his failure to deposit sales tax

Not fair on part of department to demand re-submission of old cases in accordance with Refund Claim Processing System

Department had refused to exercise jurisdiction and deferred claim on irrelevant and baseless grounds

Such unreasonable and unjust action would prove motivated and predetermined mind, which would amount to maladministration

Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended to Revenue to decide such claim after verifying transfer of goods from supplier to purchaser from transport documents, dispatch notes, receipt notes, entry in purchaser's books of accounts, verifying genuiness of payment of cost of goods inclusive of sales tax through banking channels and confirming shipment of goods to foreign buyers.