FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Through Secretary, Communications, Islamabad
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a decision of the Service Tribunal dated 18 September 1988, which had favored the respondent. The Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 to examine two specific legal questions. The first question pertains to whether the Service Tribunal correctly determined that the respondent's departmental appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit. The second question addresses whether the respondent, having submitted a reply to the charge-sheet and allegedly admitted guilt regarding the charges, could still benefit from procedural irregularities in the enquiry proceedings to secure reinstatement. Pending the final adjudication of these issues, the Supreme Court suspended the operation of the impugned order passed by the Service Tribunal. The case highlights the court's role in reviewing service matters where questions of limitation and the impact of admitted misconduct on procedural fairness arise.
- Whether the Service Tribunal correctly determined that the respondent's departmental appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit?
- Can an employee who has admitted guilt to charges in response to a charge-sheet still rely on procedural irregularities in enquiry proceedings to secure reinstatement?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---Leave to appeal is granted under Article 212(3) of the Constitution to examine the following questions of law arising out of the decision of the Service Tribunal dated 18- 9-1988:--
(1) Whether the view taken by the Service Tribunal with regard to the appeal having been riled by the respondent with the department within time, is correct and in accord with law on the subject?
(2) Whether in view of his reply to the charge-sheet (page 58 of the Paper-Book) and the admission of guilt with regard to the charges (pages 65 and 66 of the Paper Book), the irregularities in the enquiry proceedings noted by the Tribunal, could be of avail to him and result in his reinstatement?
2. The impugned order of the Service Tribunal is suspended.