Pakistan Case Law
1990 SCMR 659

Miss RAZIA SATTAR and anotherPetitoners vs MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT, MAYO HOSPITAL and 2 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1990 SCMR 659
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos.1039, 1040 and 1041 of 1988
Date1989-05-21
Judge(s)Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan
Authored bySaad Saood.Jan
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The petitioners, Staff Nurses serving in Mayo Hospital, Lahore, were removed from service following disciplinary proceedings. Their departmental appeals before the Medical Superintendent and subsequent appeals before the Provincial Service Tribunal were dismissed. They sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The core legal question was whether the Chief Nursing Superintendent was competent under the Delegation of Powers Rules to direct the removal of the petitioners from service. The Supreme Court held that under the relevant Delegation of Powers Rules relating to the Health Department, the competent authority to remove the petitioners was the officer next below the Head of the Institution, whereas the Chief Nursing Superintendent ranked lower than that position. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine the competency of the removing authority.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the Chief Nursing Superintendent was competent under the Delegation of Powers Rules to remove Staff Nurses from service?
  • Who is the competent authority to remove Staff Nurses from service under the Delegation of Powers Rules relating to the Health Department?
service tribunalleave to appealdisciplinary proceedingsremoval from servicedelegation of powerscompetent authority

ORDER

' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner in C.Ps. 1040 and 1041 and the petitioner in C.P. 1039 were Staff Nurses serving in the Mayo Hospital, Lahore. Consequent upon disciplinary proceedings taken against them, they were removed from service. ' They filed appeals before the Medical Superintendent which were dismissed. They then filed appeals before the Provincial Service Tribunal but these too met with no success. They now seek leave to appeal from this Court.

2. The orders of removal were passed by the Chief Nursing Superintendent. In support of these petitions it is contended that under the Delegation of Powers Rules, the Chief Nursing Superintendent was not competent to direct their removal from service. We have examined the Delegation of Powers Rules relating to the Health Department. Under these Rules, the officer next below the Head of the Institution was the authority competent to remove them from service. The Head of the Mayo Hospital is admittedly the Medical Superintendent. The officer next below him is the Additional Medical Superintendent. The Chief Nursing Superintendent comes in the third place.

In the circumstances the contention that the Chief Nursing Superintendent was not the officer next below the Head of the Institution needs examination. We would accordingly grant leave to the petitioners. Security for costs in the sum of Rs,2,000 in each case. The appeals may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.

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