Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH VS Respondent: PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHOREHonorable Justice RANA BHAGWANDASSheikh Salahud Din,A.H. Maqsood
2003 P L C (C
2003 P L C (C. S.) 904
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Rana Bhagwandas and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ
ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH
Versus
PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE and others
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal N0.22-L of 1999, decided on 9th May, 2002.
(On appeal from judgment of Punjab Service Tribunal dated 25-10-1998 passed in Appeal No. 1209 of 1997).
Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975---
----Rr. 4, 5 & 6---Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Art. 212(3)---Dismissal from service---Allegation of misconduct---Contention of civil servant was that he was condemned unheard and that no regular enquiry was held---Service Tribunal dismissed appeal filed by civil servant ---Validity-- Impugned judgment and record showed that proper procedure under Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline), Rules, 1975 had been observed and rules , of natural justice had been strictly adhered to---Maximum possible opportunity of defence had been provided to civil servant as he was heard both by Appointing Authority and Appellate Forum---No substantial question of law of public importance was made out---Supreme Court dismissed petition in circumstances.
Sheikh Salahud Din, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
A.H. Maqsood, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Date of hearing: 9th May, 2002:
JUDGMENT
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.---Petitioner, formerly a Constable in the Police Department at Rajanpur was dismissed from service by Superintendent of Police Rajanpur on the charge that he alongwitli an other person was running gambling den. An enquiry was ordered and, after examining witnesses and holding through probe into the charge, Enquiry Officer reported about direct involvement of the petitioner in running a gambling den. Petitioner was served with a show cause notice and afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. After complying with all legal requirements, his services were dispensed with.
2. He preferred a service appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal (hereinafter referred as the Tribunal) and agitated the grounds that he had been condemned unheard; that no regular inquiry was held and that he was not afforded a chance of being heard. All these contentions were duly considered by the Tribunal and repelled for valid reasons after consulting the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised the same arguments, which were advanced before the Tribunal. We have perused the judgment and examined the record, which clearly tends to show that proper procedure under Punjab Police Service (Efficiency and Disciplinary) Rules, 1975 was observed and the rules of natural justice were strictly adhered. It is not correct to say that the petitioner was deprived of reasonable opportunity of hearing or that no enquiry was held. He was not only - heard by the appointing authority but also by the appellate forum. Indeed maximum possible opportunity of defence was provided to him.
4. In the circumstances, no substantial question of law of general public importance is made out. Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
S.A.K./A-285/SC Petition dismissed.