Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD MANSOOB BUTT VS Respondent: MANAGING DIRECTOR, PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION And Another
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Shafi-ur-Rehman, Rustam S. Sidhwa Title:MUHAMMAD MANSOOB BUTT vs MANAGING DIRECTOR, PAKISTAN
INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION And Another Case No.: Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 407-R of 1989 Appeal No. 412(R) of 1987 Date of Judgment:1990-02-22 Reported As: 1991 SC M R1755 Result: Leave refused Judgment ORDER SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The petitioner, whose appeal against dismissal from service failed before the Service Tribunal, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 6-4-1989. 2. The petitioner was charge-sheeted for misconduct and an enquiry was held into his conduct. He was dismissed from service. He challenged the action on various grounds but failed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken up two grounds for maintaining this Petition for grant of leave to appeal. In the first place, it is contended that the charge-sheet did not specify the punishment which could be inflicted on proof of the charge, but only mentioned "appropriate disciplinary action" for the same. The second is that a copy of the enquiry report as indicated by the decision of this Court in Syed Mir Muhammad v. N.-W.F.P. Government through Chief Secretary (PLD 1981 SC 176) was not supplied to the petitioner and he has been thereby prejudiced in his defence. 4. The first legal ground has been taken care of by a decision by this Court in Syed Nasir Hussain Zaidi v. Service Tribunal, Islamabad and others (1981 SCMR 402) and we find that the rules prescribing the punishments were referred to in the charge-sheet before calling upon the petitioner to show cause against the appropriate punishment. 5. In the case of Mir Muhammad (PLD 1981 SC 176) there were exceptional features and the learned counsel himself referred to Sarfraz v. General Manager (Leaf), Pakistan Tobacco Company Ltd. And others (1988 SCMR 1352) where the copy of the enquiry report was held to be not necessary in every case. Besides, we find that personal hearing had been afforded to the petitioner and it is afforded, under the rules of service, only when major penalty of dismissal is likely to be imposed.
---
## Page 2
6. As regards the factual aspect of the case, no question of leave to appeal arises and the Petition is dismissed.