JAVAID IQBAL NASIR vs MANAGING DIRECTOR, PEPCO, and 2 others
This matter arises from a constitutional petition filed by the petitioner, an employee of WAPDA, challenging the withholding of his promotion due to a pending departmental inquiry initiated on the basis of an anonymous complaint. The core legal question was whether a departmental inquiry based on an anonymous complaint can impede a civil servant's promotion and whether such complaints are maintainable under departmental rules. The Lahore High Court held that the respondents are bound by their office instructions which explicitly dictate that no action is required on the basis of anonymous complaints, and further reaffirmed the principle that a pending departmental inquiry cannot be used to withhold a civil servant's promotion. The court accepted the petition, directing the department to decide the petitioner's promotion case strictly on merits and rules without regard to the pending inquiry.
- Can a departmental inquiry based on an anonymous complaint be entertained against an employee?
- Whether the promotion of a civil servant can be withheld due to a pending departmental inquiry?
- Are government departments bound by their own office orders regarding the handling of anonymous complaints?
ORDER
' MIAN SHAHID IQBAL, J.--- Brief facts of the case are that petitioner joined WAPDA as Assistant Budget Officer on 12-1-1985 and promoted as Budget and Accounts Officer on 10-10-1993.
Thereafter petitioner came to know that an inquiry is pending against him before respondent No, 1/General Manager (M&S) PEPCO, WAPDA House, Lahore. On 2-12-2009 the petitioner moved an application before respondent No,
1. He also filed another application on 1-3-2010 before respondent No,2 but the petitioner was not served with any show cause notice regarding the pending inquiry nor has been associated with the said inquiry.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an anonymous complaint pending against him, which the department could not entertain and proceed. Reliance is placed on Muhammad Ayaz Khan v. Government of Sindh and others, (PLC 2007 (C.S.) 716).
3. Learned counsel for the respondent who has entered appearance has submitted that he has no instructions except to enter appearance along with their departmental representative who was also unable to admit or rebut the stance taken by the petitioner.
4. Heaving heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record I feel inclined to decide the matter thereby holding that the respondents are bound by their Office Order No,C/30(Coord)6(3)A/ Vol.V/21984-22584 dated 30th June, 1980, in which it is specifically provided "that no action is required on the basis of anonymous complaint". Moreover it is settled law on which learned counsel for the petitioner relied, in which it has so been held that promotion of a civil servant cannot be withheld due to some pending departmental inquiry. As the facts of the case are that anonymous complaint has been made and the time in this regard is very important when the case of the present petitioner for promotion has to be decided on 20th March, 2007. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is accepted with the direction to the respondents/department to decide the case of the petitioner for promotion solely on merits and rules without being influenced and taking into consideration the pending inquiry against him. With this observation this writ petition is disposed of.
Cited by 6 cases
- Muhammad Shahid vs National Highway Authority and others 2024 IHC 188
- Zahhid Rashid vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary to the Prime 2023 PLC (C.S.) 251
- Gulzar Muhammad vs Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Chief 2025 PLC (C.S.) 755
- GULZAR MUHAMMAD Versus GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA through Chief Secretary, Peshawar 2025 PLC(CS) 755
- MUHAMMAD AKBAR KHAN DURRANI Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2017 PLC(CS)N 31
- Aurang Zeb Khan Toru vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry 2020 [M] C L R 485