MUHAMMAD ILYAS SHEIKH vs SECRETARY/CHAIRMAN, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
The petitioner challenged the orders of the department, departmental authorities, and the service tribunal upholding his removal from service. The petitioner had obtained ex-Pakistan leave and subsequently requested an extension for three years upon its expiry, which was refused by the department. Failing to join his duty and remaining out of Pakistan, the petitioner was proceeded against through a show-cause notice, and a major penalty of removal from service was imposed while dispensing with a regular inquiry. The core legal question was whether the departmental proceedings violated principles of natural justice and the law regarding inquiry and personal hearing. The Supreme Court held that no illegality was committed by the department, as the petitioner failed to resume his duty upon refusal of leave and was unavailable for personal hearing due to being abroad. The Court laid down the principle that a government servant who fails to resume duty after refusal of leave extension and remains unavailable cannot claim infringement of natural justice or the right to a regular inquiry when penalized for unauthorized absence.
- Whether a civil servant can claim infringement of natural justice when penalized for unauthorized absence after the refusal of leave extension?
- Can the department dispense with a regular inquiry when a government servant fails to resume duty and remains out of the country?
- Does a service matter involving unauthorized absence raise a substantial question of law of public importance under Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973?
- Article 212, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
ORDER
' MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---The petitioner after having obtained ex-Pakistan leave w,e,f, 20th July, 2001 to 17-9-2001 on account of the indisposition of his wife did not join the duty on the expiry of the leave period but requested for three years further leave from 17-9-2001. This request was disallowed by the department and despite the petitioner did not join the duty. Resultantly, show- cause notice was issued and while dispensing with the regular inquiry, major penalty from service to the petitioner was imposed by the department vide order dated 3-6-2002. The departmental appeal also could not succeed. And this, remains the result of his service appeal as well.
2. We are not convinced, if any illegality has been committed by the department in proceedings against the petitioner particularly in the circumstances, when he after the refusal of the extension of leave did not resume his duty which he was bound to do, besides, he himself was not available for personal hearing because he was out of Pakistan as per his own request for the extension, thus, he cannot make a grouse that any rule of natural justice or the requirement of law regarding notice or hearing, or about the regular inquiry has been infringed. This petition does not raise, any substantial question of law having nexus to public importance. Therefore, it is not covered by Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Therefore, it has no merit and is hereby dismissed. .
Cited by 4 cases
- Haji Maqbool Ahmad vs Nadar Khan and others 2023 PHC 608
- Haji MAQBOOL AHMAD Versus NADAR KHAN 2024 CLC 1588
- Dr. MUHAMMAD USMAN Versus COMSATS INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2017 PLC(CS) 1434
- MUHAMMAD AZAM Versus ABDUL QAYYUM KHAN 2017 CLCN 48