GENERAL MANAGER (ADMN.) And Another vs SHAFI AHMAD KHAN
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, challenging a decision rendered by a Service Tribunal. The core legal questions concern the scope of the Tribunal's jurisdiction and the propriety of its findings. Specifically, the Court is tasked with determining whether the Service Tribunal acted within its legal authority when it made adverse observations regarding the conduct of a Deputy Director who was not a party to the proceedings and whose conduct was not under review. Furthermore, the Court must decide whether the Tribunal erred in concluding that a departmental punishment was imposed in bad faith, despite the absence of any allegations or proof of mala fides against the Enquiry Officer or the relevant departmental authorities. Finally, the Court will examine whether the proved charges against the respondent warranted the penalty of compulsory retirement. The judgment grants leave to appeal to address these significant questions of law, focusing on the limitations of the Tribunal's adjudicatory powers and the evidentiary requirements for establishing bad faith in departmental disciplinary proceedings.
- Can a Service Tribunal make adverse findings regarding the conduct of an individual who is not a party to the proceedings?
- Is a finding of bad faith by a Service Tribunal sustainable when bad faith was neither alleged nor proved against the relevant authorities?
- Does the proof of charges in a departmental inquiry justify the penalty of compulsory retirement?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Leave to appeal is granted under Article 212(3) of the Constitution to examine, inter alia, the following questions of law of public importance:--
(i) Whether the Service Tribunal could justifiably hold "we cannot exonerate the Deputy Director (Muhammad Aslam)" when neither that Deputy Director nor his conduct was before the Tribunal.
(ii) Whether the Tribunal could hold that the departmental punishment awarded to the respondent was in bad faith when bad faith was neither alleged nor proved against either by the Enquiry Officer, the competent Authority or the appellate departmental authority.
2. (i.e) Whether on charges proved, the petitioner was not liable to compulsory retirement.