Reinstating in service

2025 PLC(CS) 1254 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss.2 (h), 8 & 10Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited Staff Regulations, 2005, Regln. 17Harassment at workplaceProofReinstating in service

Petitioner / employee of Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (ZTBL) was removed from service on a complaint filed by respondent whose services were terminated during her period of probation

Validity

Competent authority of ZTBL terminated services of respondent while she was still serving within the prescribed period of probation

Such termination was carried out in compliance with the terms and conditions laid down in letter of appointment and in consonance with the provisions of Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited Staff Regulations, 2005, without any allegation of misconduct or punitive stigma attached to the order of termination

Respondent was a probationer at the relevant time, who had not acquired any vested or indefeasible right to continue in service beyond probationary period, unless and until she was expressly confirmed in writing by the competent authority

Termination was within the legal framework and effected during subsistence of probation of respondent, which was well within the legal competence of the employer and did not suffer from any legal infirmity

Ombudsman while passing order in question had grossly misinterpreted and misapplied the powers conferred upon it under S. 10 of Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010

Limited powers were conferred upon competent authority or Ombudsman, which were required to be exercised strictly within the confines of the statute and in accordance with the principles of natural justice, procedural fairness, and established legal norms

Provision of S. 10 of Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010 delineates the scope of authority available to Ombudsman in determining complaints of harassment as defined under S. 2(h) of Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010

Ombudsman is required to evaluate evidence, conduct hearings, and pass a reasoned and well-founded order based on credible material on record

High Court set aside the order passed by Ombudsman on the complaint filed by respondent

High Court directed the authorities to reinstate petitioner in service with all back benefits from the date of his removal from service

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

2010 SCMR 1546 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 3 & 5Reinstating in serviceMajor penaltyRegular inquiry, dispensation ofPrinciple

Civil servant remained absent due to his illness and authorities without holding regular inquiry, dismissed him from service

Service Tribunal converted penalty of dismissal from service into removal from service

Validity

In view of allegations levelled against civil servant and several applications for leave on medical grounds as also medical certificates submitted by him before competent authority in department and realization of department itself that he needed to be examined by a Board regarding his health, it was imperative and in the interest of justice that a regular inquiry should have been conducted

For awarding a major penalty of dismissal from service and in case where documentary evidence was lacking, a regular inquiry was called for

Supreme Court set aside the judgment passed by Service Tribunal and reinstated the civil servant in service

Appeal was allowed.

2010 PLC(CS) 1143 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 3 & SReinstating in serviceMajor penaltyRegular inquiry, dispensation ofPrinciple

Civil servant remained absent due to his illness and authorities without holding regular inquiry, dismissed him from service

Service Tribunal converted penalty of dismissal from service into removal from service

Validity

In view of allegations levelled against civil servant and several applications for leave on medical grounds as also medical certificates submitted by him before competent authority in department and realization of department itself that he needed to be examined by a Board regarding his health, it was imperative and in the interest of justice that a regular inquiry should have been conducted

For awarding a major penalty of dismissal from service and in case where documentary evidence was lacking, a regular inquiry was called for

Supreme Court set aside the judgment passed by Service Tribunal and reinstated the civil servant in service

Appeal was allowed.