MUHAMMAD SAFDAR vs WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed against the judgment of the Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal challenging his dismissal from service. The petitioner, an employee of the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), was served with a charge-sheet alleging corruption and drawing excessive material from the store. He challenged the charge-sheet before the National Industrial Relations Commission (N.I.R.C.), which set it aside through an ex parte order. Despite this order, WAPDA continued inquiry proceedings and subsequently dismissed the petitioner from service. The core legal question is whether disciplinary proceedings and a dismissal order based on a charge-sheet previously set aside by a competent forum have any legal effect. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the contention regarding the nullity of proceedings conducted pursuant to a set-aside charge-sheet requires detailed consideration, thereby establishing that departmental proceedings cannot validly continue on the basis of a charge annulled by a judicial or quasi-judicial forum.
- Whether departmental proceedings and a dismissal order based on a charge-sheet that has been set aside by the National Industrial Relations Commission are of any legal effect?
- Can an employer continue disciplinary proceedings pursuant to a charge-sheet annulled by a competent quasi-judicial forum?
ORDER
' ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.- Petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 21-1-1993 alleging that he had received illegal gratification from the residents of Mauza Kakey Zayan and had also drawn excessive material from store by preparing wrong estimates. He assailed the validity of this charge-sheet before N.I.R.C. A learned member of the N.I.R.C. By an ex parte order dated 21-2-1993 set aside the charge-sheet. WAPDA moved an application before the N.I.R.C. For recalling the ex parte order dated 21-2-1993. It appears that the learned Member of N.I.R.C. Suspended the operation of his ex parte order dated 21-2-1993 on 15-11-1994 but ultimately application of WAPDA for setting aside the ex parte order was dismissed vide order dated 17-5-1995. It, however, appears that notwithstanding the fact that the charge-sheet in question was earlier set aside by N.I.R.C., WAPDA had been holding the proceedings pursuant to that charge-sheet and finally by an order dated 26-5-1994 dismissed the Petitioner from service. Petitioner challenged his dismissal from service in an appeal before the Service Tribunal but with no better result as his appeal has been dismissed vide the impugned judgment.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/caveat or. Former has contended, inter alia, that the charge-sheet on the basis whereof petitioner was dismissed from service having been set aside by a learned member of N.I.R.C.On 21-2-1993, all the proceedings taken and the dismissal order passed on the basis of allegations made in that charge-sheet were of no legal effect. Contention raised needs consideration. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted to the petitioner.