MUHAMMAD YOUSAF QURESHI vs THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal filed by a former Stamper in the District Treasury Office, Lahore, against the dismissal of his service following a significant financial defalcation. The petitioner challenged his dismissal, arguing that the departmental inquiry proceedings were conducted without his participation, thereby denying him a fair opportunity to defend himself. He contended that the Deputy Commissioner's reliance on the findings of an inquiry officer, to which the petitioner was not a party, violated fundamental principles of natural justice. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether an order of dismissal based on inquiry proceedings conducted in the absence of the accused employee constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice. Upon examination of the contention, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to determine the validity of the dismissal order. The Court recognized the necessity of examining whether the departmental process adhered to due process requirements, specifically the right to be heard and the right to defend oneself against allegations leading to termination of employment.
- Does an order of dismissal based on inquiry findings where the accused was not a party violate the principles of natural justice?
- Is an employee entitled to defend themselves in departmental inquiry proceedings before a dismissal order can be passed?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner was a Stamper in the District Treasury Office at Lahore. There was a defalcation of Rs,14,58,402 in the treasury. As a result, criminal as well as departmental proceedings were taken against the petitioner and other employees in the treasury. Consequent upon the disciplinary proceedings against the peitioner he was dismissed from service. He filed an appeal before the Commissioner but it was dismissed. He then approached the Service Tribunal but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that in the inquiry held by the departmental authorities he was not a party and as such he had no opportunity to defend himself; nevertheless, the Deputy Commissioner who passed the order of dismissal has used the findings recorded by the inquiry officer in dismissing him from service. That being so, the order of dismissal violated the principle of natural justice.
3. The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted.
Security for costs in the sum of Rs,500. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.