Pakistan Case LawMst. NARGIS KHATOON Versus DIRECTOR GENERAL, PAKISTAN BROADCASTING
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of an Intra-Court Appeal by the Lahore High Court, which had upheld the termination of the petitioner's employment from the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation following disciplinary proceedings. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was denied due process, specifically regarding notice and the opportunity to be heard. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner persistently avoided service, refused to participate in the inquiry, and maintained an uncooperative attitude despite multiple concerted efforts by the employer to associate her with the proceedings. Consequently, the plea regarding lack of personal hearing and due process was untenable. The petition was dismissed as lacking merits, reinforcing the principle that a delinquent employee who deliberately avoids disciplinary proceedings cannot subsequently claim a violation of natural justice.
- Whether an employee who deliberately avoids service of a charge-sheet can claim violation of natural justice?
- Does refusal to participate in disciplinary proceedings invalidate the inquiry report?
- When can an employer proceed ex parte against an employee in disciplinary matters?
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.---Petitioner was in employment of Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation in Scale No,4 and in consequence of disciplinary proceedings was removed from service vide order dated 22-9-1990. She filed departmental appeal which was dismissed vide order dated 21-9-1991. She filed Writ Petition No, 10049/91 in Lahore High Court, Lahore on the grounds that she was not associated with disciplinary proceedings, not served with charge-sheet, was not given personal hearing and her departmental appeal was dismissed without assigning reasons. Writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 6-2-1993 by learned Judge in Chamber, against which Intra-Court Appeal No, 116 of 1993 was filed which is dismissed vide judgment dated 12-6-1993, against which leave is sought to file appeal in this Court.
2.It appears from the decisions of the High Court mentioned above, that Corporation made sincere efforts relentlessly to associate the petitioner with disciplinary proceedings and serve charge- sheet on her but she persistently avoided service and even remained absent from duty. It is stated in the Enquiry Report that she refused to take delivery of the envelope containing charge-sheet and statement of allegations in presence of two witnesses and such efforts were repeated to serve her on her two Lahore residential addresses and address of her Advocate. Charge-sheet sent on the third address mentioned above, was accepted as per postal receipt but she did not file written defence and refused to participate in the proceedings. A notice calling upon her to join proceedings was published in "Nawa-e-Waqt" dated 31-12-1989. Station Director sent charge-sheet at her official address through registered post on 15-1-1990, which was accepted by her but with. Response. In such circumstances after giving several opportunities to her to appear and participate in the proceedings and on her persistent non-cooperation, prosecution evidence was brought on the record and statements were recorded on 24th, 25th, 26th and 27th March, 1990, but still petitioner did not participate.
3.Petitioner was unable to satisfy the High Court in writ proceedings that she was ready and willing and was not joined in the proceedings by the Corporation with mala fide intention. With such uncooperative attitude, question of not getting personal hearing does not arise. High Court while dismissing writ petition has given very valid reasons with which no interference was made in the Intra-Court Appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out before us any flaw or legal infirmity in the judgment of the High Court in Intra-Court Appeal, hence we are of the view that it is not a fit case for leave, which is refused and this petition is dismissed as lacking merits.
Judges on this bench
- Saad Saood Jan2,559 judgments
- Sajjad Ali Shah1,895 judgments