Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

2007 P L C (C.S.) 822

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, JJ

SECRETARY, HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 2 others

Versus

Dr. NISAR AHMAD

Civil Petition No.831-L of 2003, decided on 18th February, 2004.

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 29-1-2003 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore passed in Appeal No.2904 of 2002).

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)---

----S. 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)---Appeal before Service Tribunal, barred by limitation---New plea, raising of---Service Tribunal reinstated civil servant with a direction to hold de novo inquiry---Plea raised by Authorities was that the appeal was time -barred---Validity---Such ground was not available to Authorities as the point was not taken up by them before Service Tribunal specifically---Order of Service Tribunal was just and proper as it had directed the Department to hold de novo inquiry---Case of Authorities, warranted no interference by Supreme Court under Art.212(3) of the Constitution---Leave to appeal was refused.

Raja Abdur Rehman, A.A.-G. and Mian Ghulam Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.

Mian Saleem Saigal, Advocate Supreme Court and C.M. Lateef, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 18th February, 2004.

JUDGMENT

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 29-1-2003, operative paragraphs wherefrom is reproduced hereinbelow:

"(10) I have heard the arguments in detail and have also perused the record.

(11) A bare reading of the inquiry report astounded me that the Inquiry Officer has only reproduced verbatim the defence of accused/appellants and without giving reason or logic held them guilty in his conclusion arrived at in view lines. It is probably for this reason that the Authority had to consult the Inquiry Officer and held consultation with Dr. Yasmin Lodhi, Director, Directorate of Blood Transfusion Service, Punjab, Lahore. The Authority undoubtedly could obtain opinion or views of the above-mentioned persons but in the presence of the appellants after ensuring that if any adverse views were recorded against the appellants, they should have been given a chance to refute it. Another factor, which has surprised me it recording of the observation by the Inquiry Officer at the end of the report reproduced in this judgment in the preceding paragraph. Various aspersions upon the working of the Chief Executive, P.M.C. M.S. Allied Hospital Faisalabad and M.S. D.H.Q. Hospital along with Accounts Officers attached with the Chief Executive has also been cast. These observations show that all was not well in the Hospital for which the blame, if any, although not succinctly proved, had to be shared by others, apart from the appellants. I also agree with the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants that the penalty of recovery has been, imposed without letting the appellants know as to the item; regarding which financial irregularities have been committed and to what extent, by adducing concrete evidence. Extreme penalty of removal from service passed against Dr. Nisar Ahmad is without any tangible evidence to connect him with the commission of any misconduct.

(12) The upshot of the discussion leads me to the conclusion that the proceedings have been conducted in a manner totally bereft of legal norms as such the appeals have to be accepted. I accept the appeals, set aside the order, dated 1-8-2002 passed by Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Health Department, Lahore. Dr. Nisar Ahmad, appellant, shall be reinstated in service, however, intervening period between removal from service and reinstatement shall be treated as leave of the kind due."

Raja Abdul Rehman, learned A.A.-G. appearing in support of this petition has stated that the appeal filed by the respondent before the Punjab Service Tribunal (hereinafter to be called as the Tribunal) was barred by time but despite of that relief has been given to respondent. In our view, this ground is not available to the petitioners because this point was not taken up by the petitioners before the Tribunal specifically. Beside it, the Tribunal has disposed of the appeal with the direction to the Department to hold a de novo inquiry, therefore, in our opinion tote order of the Tribunal is just and proper in the circumstances of the case, as such, warrants no interference by this Court under Article 212(3) of the Constitution.

Thus, for the foregoing reasons, petition is dismissed.

M.H./S-84/SC Leave refused.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Supreme Court of Pakistan
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant