NAZIR AHMAD vs DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, GUJRANWALA and others
The petitioner, a forest guard, was dismissed from service due to unauthorized absence for two distinct periods. His departmental appeal resulted in the conversion of his dismissal into compulsory retirement by the Conservator of Forest, taking into account his long service. A subsequent appeal filed by the petitioner before the Service Tribunal was dismissed. The petitioner then sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Supreme Court determined that ample material existed before the departmental authority to justify the disciplinary action taken against him. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose for its determination in the matter. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was refused, affirming the decision of the Service Tribunal.
- Whether unauthorized absence from duty constitutes sufficient ground for departmental action and dismissal from service?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent factual findings of departmental authorities and the Service Tribunal when sufficient material exists?
- Whether an appeal arising from a service dispute involving purely factual determinations raises a question of law warranting leave to appeal?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was a forest guard and was at the relevant time serving in Gujranwala Forest Division. On account of unauthorised absence for two periods falling between 29-9-1983 and 2-10-1983 and 7-11-1988 and 15-1-1989, departmental proceedings were taken against him and he was dismissed from service. He filed an appeal before the Conservator of Forest who on account of his long service converted the order of dismissal into one of compulsory retirement. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal. It was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we find that there was sufficient material before the departmental authority for taking the action which it did in this case. No question of law for the decision of this Court arises in this petition. Leave is refused.