Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1179

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others vs M. NASRULLAH KHAN

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1179
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,1084 of 1981
Date1988-07-13
Judge(s)Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byGhulam Mujaddid
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The Government of the Punjab and the Commissioner, Multan Division, filed a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 12-10-1981, which had ordered the expungement of adverse remarks recorded in the service record of the respondent, M. Nasrullah Khan. The petitioners' counsel contended that the Tribunal acted contrary to law in granting relief to an employee with an unclean record. The Supreme Court of Pakistan considered whether the Tribunal's order was in accordance with law or involved any question of public importance. Finding no such question of public importance or illegality in the impugned order, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with a service tribunal's order expunging adverse remarks in the absence of a question of public importance?
  • Does an adverse remark expunged by the Punjab Service Tribunal raise a substantial question of law warranting leave to appeal?
service tribunaladverse remarksexpungementpetition for leave to appealpublic importance

ORDER

1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--Government of the Punjab through Secretary, S.GA. And I Department, Lahore and Commissioner, Multan Division, Multan have filed this petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 12-10-1981 whereby the adverse remarks given to the respondent were ordered to be expunged.

2. ' Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the Tribunal acted contrary to law in giving this concession to the respondent whose record was not clean.

3. We are not concerned with that. All that we have to see is whether the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law or there is any question of public importance to be determined. There is no such thing in the impugned order. Hence the petition is dismissed.

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