AKBAR KHAN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Establishment
This petition for leave to appeal arises from the dismissal of the petitioner, an Assistant In-charge at the Federal Service Tribunal, following allegations of accepting illegal gratification. After an initial inquiry and a remand for a fresh inquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. During the pendency of this appeal, the petitioner filed an application seeking to amend his Memorandum of Appeal to include additional grounds. The Federal Service Tribunal dismissed the appeal without first deciding or disposing of the petitioner's application for amendment. The petitioner challenged this dismissal before the Supreme Court, contending that he was denied a personal hearing after the remand and that the Tribunal erred by ignoring his pending application for amendment. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the petitioner was entitled to a personal hearing after the remand, whether the failure to provide such a hearing denied him a reasonable opportunity to defend himself, and whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deciding the appeal without disposing of the pending amendment application.
- Whether an employee is entitled to a personal hearing by the Authorized Officer and the Authority after a case is remanded for a fresh inquiry?
- Does the failure to provide a personal hearing after a remand constitute a denial of a reasonable opportunity to defend oneself?
- Is the Federal Service Tribunal legally required to dispose of an application for the amendment of a Memorandum of Appeal before deciding the appeal on its merits?
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal arises from the facts that Akbar Khan petitioner was working as Assistant In charge in the office of the Federal Service Tribunal. On the charge of accepting illegal gratification, an enquiry was held against him. He was charge- sheeted. He was given final show-cause notice and personal hearing by the concerned officers. At the stage of personal hearing by the Authority (Chairman, Federal Service Tribunal), the case was remanded for fresh enquiry. After remand, the Enquiry Officer conducted enquiry and submitted his report to the Authorized Officer who forwarded it to the Authority. The petitioner was ultimately dismissed from service on 20-7-1993. Feeling aggrieved thereby, he filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal he moved application for permission to amend the Memorandum of Appeal in order to take additional grounds therein. The Service Tribunal, however, without deciding his application for amendment of the Memorandum of Appeal, had dismissed the appeal vide its judgment dated 22-6-1994. Hence this petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended before us that after the remand no opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner by the Authorized Officer, or by the Authority and he has been dismissed from service simply on the report of the Enquiry Officer. Learned counsel has further contended that although the petitioner had moved an application for amendment of the Memorandum of Appeal in order to add more grounds therein but the learned Tribunal has just ignored the application and has decided the appeal without disposing of the aforesaid application.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, leave to appeal is granted to consider:
(i) Whether after remand the petitioner was entitled to an opportunity of personal hearing by the Authorized Officer and the Authority as well?
(ii) Whether by no giving him the opportunity of personal hearing the reasonable opportunity to defend himself has not been denied to the petitioner? And
(iii) Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deciding the appeal without first disposing of the application for the amendment of the Memorandum of Appeal filed by the petitioner