Engineer MAJEED AHMED MEMON vs LIAQUAT UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES, JAMSHORO and others
This petition arises from an order of the High Court of Sindh concerning the termination of the petitioner, a probationer employed by the Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences. The petitioner was terminated following a show-cause notice alleging misconduct under the Removal From Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000. The core legal question is whether a probationer facing specific allegations of misconduct, such as corruption or irregularity, can be terminated without conducting a formal inquiry or providing a personal hearing. The petitioner contends that despite his probationary status, the nature of the allegations necessitates a proper inquiry process. The Supreme Court, noting that the petitioner's contentions are supported by the precedent established in Muhammad Siddiq Javaid Chaudhry v. The Government of West Pakistan (PLD 1974 SC 393), granted leave to appeal. The Court held that the matter requires further consideration by a larger bench to determine if the summary termination of a probationer, when based on specific charges of misconduct, violates procedural fairness and established legal principles regarding disciplinary proceedings.
- Can a probationer be terminated for misconduct without a formal inquiry?
- Is a personal hearing mandatory for a probationer facing allegations of corruption or irregularity?
- Does the Removal From Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000 require an inquiry for probationers facing specific charges?
- Removal From Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000
ORDER
' SABIHUDDIN AHMED, J.--- This petition is directed against the order dated, 13-11-2008 passed by honourable High Court of Sindh in C.P.No,D-1202 of 2008.
2. The petitioner though working as a probationer in the respondents university was served with a show-cause notice containing allegations of misconduct under the Removal From Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000. He submitted a reply to the notice but admittedly neither an inquiry was held nor was a personal hearing accorded to him. On 7-11-2007 an order terminating the petitioner's services on the basis of charges levelled was passed.
3. Mr. Ansari Abdul Lateef, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that even while being a probationer since there were definite allegations of corruption or irregularity he could not be removed without a proper inquiry. Reliance is placed on the pronouncement of this Court in the case of Muhammad Siddiq Javaid Chaudhry v. The Government of West Pakistan reported in (PLD 1974 SC 393) which prima facie supports his point of view, Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted.
Appeal may be ready within three weeks and be listed for hearing whenever a Bench of three honourable Judges is available thereafter. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.