Pakistan Case Law
1982 SCMR 519

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND LAND CUSTOMS AND 2 Others vs ASLAM

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1982 SCMR 519
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1260 of 1980
Date1981-04-03
Judge(s)Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Shafi‑ur‑Rahman
Authored byAbdul Kadir Shaikh
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for special leave to appeal filed by the Collector of Central Excise and Land Customs against a decision of the High Court. The core legal question for consideration is whether, in view of the specific prohibition contained in rule 10-A of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 against representation by an advocate in proceedings under those rules, a government servant is nevertheless entitled to be represented by counsel in departmental proceedings. The Supreme Court held that this question of law is of significant importance and likely to affect a large number of cases, thereby deserving an authoritative decision by the apex court. Consequently, the Court granted special leave to appeal, directed the appeal to be made ready on the existing record for an early hearing, and deferred the consideration regarding the suspension of the impugned High Court order.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a party to proceedings under the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 is entitled to be represented by an advocate in the face of the specific bar under rule 10-A?
  • Does the High Court take a correct view in allowing a respondent to be represented through counsel during departmental proceedings despite statutory restrictions?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Rule 10-A, Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973
departmental proceedingsrepresentation by advocategovernment servantsefficiency and disciplinespecial leave to appeal

ORDER

1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.-The question for consideration in this petition is whether in the face of specific provisions of rule 10-A of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 that no party to any proceed--ings under the rules shall be represented by an Advocate, the High Court has taken the correct view that the respondent is entitled to be represented through a counsel for the departmental proceedings being held against him.

2. This is an important question of law likely to affect large number of cases and, therefore, deserves an authoritative decision by this Court. Special leave is granted.

3. Appeal to be made ready on the present record and fixed for an early hearing. It is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.

4. The consideration of the request for suspension of the impugned order of the High Court is deferred to a date in office. The case to come up again/ at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner after notice to the learned counsel for the caveator.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.