IKRAMULLAH vs CITY SUPERINTENDENT, POST OFFICES, PESHAWAR and others
The petitioner, an officiating clerk in the postal department, challenged his removal from service through a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal. The core legal question was whether the departmental proceedings and subsequent punishment of removal from service suffered from any legal infirmity. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the petitioner was removed after a proper inquiry, the departmental proceedings were free from infirmity, and the punishment of removal was well-justified given the established allegations of misconduct, misbehaviour, and unauthorized absence. The petition was accordingly dismissed as meritless. The key principle laid down is that where departmental proceedings are conducted in accordance with law and establish charges of misconduct, the resultant penalty of removal from service warrants no interference by the courts.
- Whether departmental proceedings conducted after a proper inquiry and opportunity of defense warrant interference by the Supreme Court?
- Does the reduction of punishment from dismissal to removal from service in a departmental appeal preclude the dismissal of a subsequent service tribunal appeal?
- Whether unauthorized absence and misconduct constitute sufficient grounds for removal from service?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was serving as officiating Berk in the office of the Post Master, Peshawar City. There were allegations of misconduct, misbehaviour and unauthorised absence from duty against him. He was served with a charge-sheet and an Inquiry Officer was appointed.
On the basis of the fmdings of the Inquiry Officer and after giving a further opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself the City Superintendent of Post Offices dismissed him for service. He preferred a departmental appeal before the Deputy Post Master-General. The appeal partly succeeded inasmuch as the punishment awarded to him was reduced to removal from service. He filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The petitioner has been removed from service after a proper inquiry. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that the departmental proceedings taken against him suffered from any infirmity. Considering the allegations that stand established against him he seems to have been lightly treated in the matter of punishment. This petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed.