Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1224

THE DIRECTORGENERAL (FIELD), AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, LAHORE and another vs Haji ABDUL REHMAN

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1224
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,1226 of 1983 C
Date1988-08-09
Judge(s)Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash
Authored byAli Hussain Qazilbash
ResultLeave refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which had set aside the termination of the respondent's services. The respondent, an Assistant in the Office of the Director, Soil Conservation, Punjab, had his services terminated twice for the same charge of wilful absence from duty. After the first termination was set aside by the Director and the period of absence treated as leave without pay, the respondent was terminated again on the same charges in 1982. The Punjab Service Tribunal held that the second termination order was unlawful and void ab initio, reasoning that an employee cannot be vexed twice for the same charge. The Supreme Court of Pakistan, upon hearing the petitioners, found no merit in the petition and dismissed it. The Court affirmed the principle that an employee cannot be subjected to disciplinary proceedings or termination twice for the same alleged misconduct once that matter has been previously adjudicated and resolved by the competent authority.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can an employee be terminated twice for the same charge of wilful absence from duty?
  • Is a second termination order based on the same charges for which a previous termination was set aside considered void ab initio?
service lawdouble jeopardytermination of servicedisciplinary proceedingswilful absenceservice tribunal

ORDER

' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This petition for leave to appeal arises from the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 31-7-1983.

2. The services of the respondent who was working as an Assistant in the Office of the Director, Soil Conservation, Punjab, Rawalpindi, were terminated on 11-2-1978 on account of wilful absence from duty. On appeal by him, the Director, however, set aside the order of termination of his services, the period of absence was treated as leave without pay and a warning was given to him. The respondent's services were again terminated on 12-7-1982 on the same charges. He approached the High Court but was directed to seek his remedy before the Punjab Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal after considering the case held that the subsequent order was unlawful and void ab initio in that the respondent A could not be vexed for the same charge twice, hence the present petition.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and we hardly find any merit in this petition. The same is dismissed.

Cited by 26 cases

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