ASJAD HUSSAIN vs CHIEF ENGINEER (ADMINISTRATION) POWER, WAPDA and others
The petitioner, a WAPDA employee, challenged his removal from service for willful absence from duty, which occurred after the expiry of his 730-day ex-Pakistan study leave. Following the imposition of a major penalty by the competent authority under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, and the subsequent dismissal of his departmental appeal and service appeal by the Federal Service Tribunal, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court. The petitioner argued discrimination, claiming other employees facing similar charges received different treatment, and contended that his absence was due to medical grounds. The Supreme Court reviewed the matter and observed that the petitioner remained absent without authorization for four years and failed to provide a credible explanation for his failure to resume duty. Finding no question of law of public importance, the Court held that the petition did not warrant the grant of leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, affirming the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner for his prolonged unauthorized absence.
- Does a prolonged, unexplained absence from duty after the expiry of sanctioned study leave constitute grounds for removal from service?
- What constitutes a question of law of public importance under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan in service matters?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be granted where the petitioner fails to provide a credible explanation for unauthorized absence from service?
- Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD SAIR ALI, J.---The petitioner was proceeded against for wilful absence from duty with effect from 8-1-2003 onwards under Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000.
Major penalty of removal from service was imposed upon him through order dated 9-9-2006 by the competent authority. His departmental appeal was rejected. The service appeal (Appeal No,601 (L)CS/2006) filed by him before Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore, was also dismissed, vide impugned judgment dated 4-2-2010 Hence this petition.
2. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was discriminated against as some other employees of the department facing the identical charges have been given different treatment by the departmental authorities. Further that the petitioner after availing ex-Pakistan study leave of 730 days applied for extension in leave on medical ground, but the department after rejecting his reply to the show-cause notice dated 6-5-2006, removed him from service.
3. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and find the petitioner to have absented himself from duty without leave for four years after expiry of his sanctioned ex-Pakistan study leave of 730 days. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner was unable to credibly explain even before us the reasons for absence of the petitioner abroad and for non-joining the service after expiry of ex-Pakistan study leave.
4. In view of the above noted position and in presence of the unexplained and unsanctioned leave of the petitioner, we do not find any question of law of public importance within the meaning of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for the grant of leave to appeal. In view thereof, this petition is dismissed and .