PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Additional Chief - Secretary, Government of Punjab and another vs MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE KHAN
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Province of the Punjab against the judgment and order dated 31-3-1998 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal. The Punjab Service Tribunal had set aside the departmental orders dismissing and subsequently demoting the respondent from service, on the ground that major penalties were imposed without conducting a regular inquiry, conceding to this fact during the proceedings. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a major penalty of dismissal or demotion could be validly imposed upon a civil servant without holding a regular inquiry. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that major penalties cannot be awarded without a regular inquiry, affirming the Tribunal's decision which relied upon the established dictum of the apex court in Lal Muhammad and another v. Government of Sindh (1980 SCMR 850). The key principle laid down is that the imposition of major penalties in service matters mandates the holding of a regular departmental inquiry, and failure to do so renders the disciplinary orders illegal and liable to be set aside.
- Can a major penalty be legally awarded to a civil servant without holding a regular inquiry?
- Whether the Punjab Service Tribunal is justified in setting aside a penalty imposed without a regular departmental inquiry?
- Does the imposition of dismissal or demotion without a regular inquiry violate established legal dicta of the Supreme Court?
ORDER
' SH. RIAZ AHMED, J.---The Province of the Punjab through the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab and another seek leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 31-3-1998 delivered by the Punjab Service Tribunal whereby it was held that major penalty could not have been awarded to the respondent without holding a regular inquiry and thus the order impugned dated 1-8-1994 dismissing the respondent from service and the order dated 4-9- 1994 whereby the punishment of dismissal was reduced and the petitioner was demoted and reinstated were set aside. In fact it was conceded by the contesting department before the Tribunal that without holding regular inquiry the major penalties were imposed, upon the respondent. In view of the dictum laid down by this Court in the case reported as Lal Muhammad and another v. Government of Sindh (1980 SCM R 850) the Tribunal rightly concluded that the dismissal of the respondent from service and the subsequent reduction in the punishment were violative of the said dictum and thus both the orders were set aside.
2. After hearing the learned counsel at length, we do not find any merit' in this petition. The Tribunal had rightly acted in setting aside both the orders by placing reliance upon the law laid down by this Court. The petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 3 cases
- INSPECTOR IRSHAD AHMED SOHAIL vs CAPITAL CITY POLICE OFFICER/ADDL. 2006 PLC (C.S.) 852
- ZULFIQAR ALI vs SECRETARY EDUCATION 2003 PLC (C.S.) 1089
- RIZWAN MEHMOOD, EX-DRIVER NO. 727, PS CHAK JHUMRA, DISTRICT 2011 PLJ Tr.C. (Services) 7