GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Livestock and Dairy
The Government of the Punjab sought leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan against a judgment of the Service Tribunal that set aside the compulsory retirement of the respondent, an Assistant Research Officer, and directed his reinstatement with back benefits. The respondent had been proceeded against departmentally for overstaying his leave ex-Pakistan. Although the Enquiry Officer and the Authorised Officer exonerated him, the competent authority imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement without recording reasons for differing with their recommendations. The Service Tribunal set aside the retirement order on the ground that the authority failed to provide reasons for disagreeing with the exoneration. The Supreme Court of Pakistan evaluated the matter and found that the factual aspects had been thoroughly examined by the lower forums and that no substantial question of law of public importance arose under the constitutional provision to warrant interference. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, affirming the decision of the Service Tribunal.
- Whether the competent authority can differ from the recommendations of the Enquiry Officer and Authorised Officer without providing reasons?
- Does an order of compulsory retirement passed without assigning reasons for rejecting exoneration sustain scrutiny before the Service Tribunal?
- When will the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan in service matters?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The Government of the Punjab seeks leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution against the judgment of the Service Tribunal whereby the order of compulsory retirement of the respondent was set aside and he was directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits.
2. The respondent was Assistant Research Officer in the Veterinary Research Institute and he was proceeded against departmentally for over-staying his leave ex-Pakistan from 1-11-1982 to 19-5- 1983 when the rejection of the leave was conveyed to him by a letter dated 18-5-1982. The Enquiry Officer exonerated him. The competent authority after serving a show-cause notice and hearing him ordered his compulsory retirement from service from 1-11-1980.
' The Service Tribunal set aside the compulsory retirement holding as hereunder:-- "The Enquiry Officer after making elaborate inquiry came to the conclusion that the appellant's case was genuine and exonerated him from the charge of wilful absence. Furthermore what I find in this case is that even the Authorised Officer agreed with the Enquiry Officer and exonerated the appellant, finding his case as genuine. This being the facts of the case, the ratio decidendi of this ruling of the Supreme Court of Pakistan will be fully applicable to the case of the appellant. The Authority in this case while serving a show-cause notice has failed to mention a single reason for not accepting recommendations of the Enquiry Officer as well as by the Authorised Officer, therefore, the impugned order so passed by him could not be sustained.
' The result is I accept the appeal, set aside the impugned orders and direct that the appellant be reinstated in service with all back benefits. There will be no order as to costs."
3. We find that the factual aspect of the case has received full attention of the authorities who were called upon to look into the case and no question of law of public importance as envisaged by the constitutional provision arises in the case to call for further examination. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.
Cited by 3 cases
- S.M. NAWAZ vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE through Secretary and another 2010 PLC (C.S.) 501
- S.M. NAWAZ Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE through Secretary 2011 PLC(CS) 501
- MUHAMMAD AZHAR MALIK, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SIR 2016 PLJ Tr.C. (Services) 342