Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: AFTAB AHMED VS Respondent: GENERAL MANAGER, WAPDA
1995 P L C (C
1995 P L C (C.S.) 871
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, and Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ
Ch. AFTAB AHMED
versus
GENERAL MANAGER, WAPDA and another
Civil Petition No. 676‑L of 1993, decided on 28th May, 1994.
(On appeal from the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal dated 31‑1‑1993 passed in Appeal No. 228(L) of 1984),
Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978---
‑‑‑‑R. 12‑‑Constitution of Pakistan, (1973), Art. 212(3)‑‑‑Misconduct‑‑‑Civil servant was initially awarded major penalty of reducing him to lower stage in his time sere for period of two years‑‑‑During pendency of civil servant's Departmental appeal, notice was issued to him proposing to reconsider punishment imposed upon him in terms of R. 12, Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1978---Penalty of dismissal from service was thereafter, imposed upon civil servant ‑‑ Validity‑‑‑heave to appeal was granted to consider whether Service Tribunal had failed to consider that order in question passed by Authority was not sustainable for it did not disclose any reasons for enhancement of punishment.
Muhammad Riaz Butt 1993 SCMR 1134 rel.
Muhammad Zaman Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record and Ghulam Hassan Gulshan,, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 28th May, 1994.
JUDGMENT
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J. ‑‑The petitioner is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of Federal Service Tribunal dated 31‑1‑1993.
2. The relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner was proceeded departmentally for committing misconduct and after completion of all the formalities, major penalty of reducing him to the lowest stage in his time‑scale for a period of two years was imposed by the General Manager (Planning) WAPDA on 27‑2‑1984. The petitioner addressed a departmental appeal and during pendency of the appeal a notice was issued to the petitioner under Rule 12 of Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Disciplinary) Rules, 1978, proposing to reconsider the punishment imposed on the petitioner. A show cause notice was, accordingly, issued to the petitioner and the authority after hearing the petitioner by order dated 27‑G‑1984 dismissed him from service. The dismissal order of the petitioner reads as follows:‑‑
"After considering the Defence Reply dated 25‑4‑1984 of Ch. Aftab Ahmed, Senior Engineer (O&M Section), Office of General Manager and Project Director, Tarbela Dam Project, WAPDA; Tarbela, to the Notice served upon him under No.GM(Admn)/AD(Rev.)/05005/ 129/856, dated 13‑5‑1984, the authority in exercise of powers conferred on it under Rule 12 of the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Disciplinary) Rules, 1978 has decided to impose penalty of dismissal from service, as defined in the aforesaid rules upon Ch. Aftab Ahmed, Senior Engineer.
Ch. Aftab Ahmed, Senior Engineer, is therefore, hereby, dismissed from service with immediate effect:"
3. The Federal Service Tribunal refused to interfere with the above order of dismissal from service on the ground that there was no irregularity in enquiry proceedings conducted by the respondent.
4. In seeking leave to appeal the learned counsel for the petitioner contended before us that the learned Service Tribunal failed to consider that the order dated 27‑6‑1984 purported to have been passed by the authority under Rule 12 of the Pakistan WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Disciplinary) Rules, 1978 was not sustainable as it did not disclose any reason for enhancement of the punishment. Reliance in this connection has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the case of WAPDA v. Muhammad Riaz Butt (1993 SCMR 1134). The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner requires examination and we, accordingly, grant leave to appeal to consider the same.
A.A./A‑1235/S Leave granted.