DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION Versus MUHAMMAD YUSUF SHAMI
The Director of Education filed petitions for special leave to appeal against orders dated 28th October 1986 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, which expunged adverse remarks recorded in the annual confidential reports of the respondent on the ground of bias. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the Service Tribunal erred in relying upon the comments of the Director of Education, Lahore Region, rather than the Director Education, Rawalpindi Division. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised by the petitioner lacked merit as the Education Department had not disowned the comments of the Lahore Directorate before the Tribunal, and further observed that no substantial question of law of public importance arose in the matter. Consequently, the Court refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petitions, affirming the Tribunal's orders expunging the biased adverse remarks.
- Whether the Service Tribunal can rely on comments furnished by a departmental authority other than the immediate reporting officer?
- Does an expungement of adverse remarks on the ground of bias raise a substantial question of law of public importance?
- When will the Supreme Court refuse leave to appeal against an order of the Service Tribunal?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- In these petitions for special leave to appeal the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders dated 28th October. 1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal expunging the adverse remarks recorded in the annual confidential reports of the respondent. orders of the Tribunal are based on a finding that the remarks question were biased.
2. In support of these petitions, it is urged by the learned Additional Advocate-General that the Tribunal has acted on the comments of the Director of Education, Lahore Region, whereas the more appropriate authority to give comments was the Director Education, Rawalpindi Division. We find no merit in this contention, for, it does not appear that before the Tribunal the Education Department had disowned the comments of the Lahore Directorate. In any event, no substantial question of law of public importance arises in these petitions. Leave to appeal is refused.
M.I. /D-15/S Petition dismissed.