Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD AKRAM VS Respondent: ABDUL GHAFOORHonorable Justice JAVED IQBALPervez Inayat Malik,Nemo
2004 P L C (C
2004 P L C (C.S.) 740
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Javed Iqbal and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ
MUHAMMAD AKRAM
Versus
ABDUL GHAFOOR
Civil Petitions Nos. 3564 and 3565‑L of 2001, decided on 25th April, 2003.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 10‑10‑2001 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, passed in Appeals Nos. 1495 of 2000, 1503 of 2000).
Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑‑--
‑‑‑‑S.4‑‑‑Power of Service Tribunal to remand case in appeal filed against departmental order‑‑‑Scope‑‑‑Service Tribunal being appellate forum could confirm set aside or modify impugned order or remand case subject to lawful justification.
Gohar Masood v. Secretary, Health Department 2001 SCMR 1128; M. Yamin Qureshi v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan PLD 1980 SC 22 and Federation of Pakistan v. Rais Khan 1993 SCMR 609 rel.
Pervez Inayat Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record for petitioners (in both cases).
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 25th April, 2003.
ORDER
JAVED IQBAL, J.‑‑‑These petitions for leave to appeal are directed against common judgment dated 10‑10‑2001 passed by learned Punjab Service Tribunal, .Lahore, whereby the appeals preferred on behalf of petitioners have been accepted with the direction to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioners by issuing show‑cause notice and after affording proper opportunity of hearing and completion of necessary formalities further action should be taken. The above captioned petitions involving similar questions of law and facts are being disposed of by this order.
2. Heard Mr. Pervez Inayat Malik, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner at length. We have carefully examined the judgment impugned which is in consonance with the dictum as laid down by this Court in case titled Gohar Masood v. Secretary, Health Department (2001 SCMR 1128), whereby the competent authority was directed to follow the prescribed procedure in letter and spirit and adjudication of service matter in accordance with law and merits. We are not persuaded with Mr. Pervez Inayat Malik, learned Advocate Supreme Court for petitioners that the matter could not have been remanded as the Service Tribunal is not empowered to do so for the simple reason that A the Service Tribunal being appellate forum can confirm, set aside or modify the order impugned before it or remand the case subject to lawful justification which is available in this case. In this regard we are fortified by the dictum as laid down in cases titled M. Yamin Qureshi v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan (PLD 1980 SC 22), Federation of Pakistan v. Rais Khan (1993 SCMR 609).
3. In view of the Service Tribunal, initiation of fresh proceedings was inevitable enabling the petitioners to furnish a proper reply regarding their reversion from the post of learning Coordinator to that of PTC teacher and accordingly the competent authority has been directed by remanding the case to dilate upon the issue with diligent application of mind and dispose it of by passing a speaking order. No injustice whatsoever has been done to the petitioner. The judgment impugned being free from any illegality does not warrant any interference. No question of law of public importance is involved which could persuade us to grant leave as contemplated in Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The petitions being devoid of merit are dismissed.
SA.K./M‑46/S Petitions dismissed.