MUHAMMAD YOUSIF MEMON vs GOVERNOR OF SIND
This petition for leave to appeal challenges the judgment of the Sind Service Tribunal, which upheld the petitioner's dismissal from his position as an Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner, having been dismissed by the Chief Minister of Sind following disciplinary proceedings conducted under the Sind Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, contended that he was denied sufficient opportunity to defend himself and was refused access to certain documents during the inquiry. Upon reviewing the record, the Supreme Court found that the petitioner had fully participated in the inquiry proceedings and noted that the grievance regarding the lack of opportunity to defend was not raised before the Service Tribunal. Furthermore, the Court examined the Registrar's correspondence, which clarified that the requested documents were either already in the petitioner's possession or irrelevant to his case. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's contentions lacked substance. The petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, affirming that procedural fairness was maintained throughout the disciplinary process and that the petitioner's rights were not violated during the inquiry.
- Whether a civil servant can claim denial of opportunity to defend if they fully participated in the inquiry proceedings?
- Is a disciplinary authority justified in refusing access to documents that are either already in the possession of the accused or irrelevant to the charges?
- Can a plea regarding the denial of opportunity to defend be raised for the first time in an appeal before the Supreme Court if it was not urged before the Service Tribunal?
- Sind Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973
ORDER
1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J,--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of Sind Service Tribunal dated 30-4-1988 dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of his dismissal from service dated 14-8-1986 by the Chief Minister Sind.
2. ' Facts of the case briefly stated are that while petitioner was serving as Additional Sessions Judge, a notice was issued to him under the provisions of Sind Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline)
3. Rules, 1973 to show cause why a major penalty should not be imposed upon him on the allegations set out in the notice and also the charge-sheet served upon him by the Chief Justice of Sind High Court in his capacity as the authorised officer under the Rules. Thereafter, on the basis of Inquiry Report of a Judge of High Court, petitioner was dismissed from service by the Chief Minister by the order dated 14-8-1986. This order was upheld by the Service Tribunal and petitioner's appeal was dismissed, and it is in these circumstances that petitioner now seeks leave to appeal from the judgment of the Service Tribunal.
4. Petitioner who appears in person in support of the petition submits that he was not granted sufficient opportunity to defend the case against him and copies of certain documents were also not supplied to him.
5. After having gone through the record of the case, we find no substance in both these pleas. There can be no doubt that petitioner fully participated in the proceedings of the Inquiry held against him, and it appears from the impugned judgment of the Service Tribunal that the first complaint made before us was not even urged before the Service Tribunal. With regard to petitioner's allegation that copies of certain documents were not supplied to him, reference may just be made to the letter issued to him by the Registrar of the High Court dated 9-4-1988 which reads as under:- - "To ' Mr. Muhammad Yousuf Memon, A-21, Khayaban-e-Erum, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, 13-B, University Road, Karachi.
6. ' Subject:-- SUPPLY OF COPIES.
7. ' I am directed to refer your application dated 24-3-1988 on the above subject and to inform you that the Hon'ble Chief Justice after perusal of your above referred application has observed that your request cannot be acceded to, as most of the documents as listed in your application are available with you. As regards rest of the documents of the list, it is to inform you that they do not relate to you. Sd/- 9-4-88 (GHOUS MOHAMMAD) REGISTRAR"
8. We therefore find no substance in both the pleas raised by the petitioner IC in support of the petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- MUHAMMAD ASIM MALIK vs ANWAR JALIL and 4 others PLD 19 Lahore 279
- MUHAMMAD ASIM MALIK Versus ANWAL JALIL 1989 PLD 279