Find a Lawyer

WAPDA versus KARAMAT ALI BAJWA

R5A Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 WAPDA employee's complete absence from duty for a continuous period of 6 months, exchange of offense with no effect of preventing the increase of one year, Rule 5A, The Employees (Capacity and Discipline) Rules of Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority were not attracted to 1978, where there was a continuous absence for almost 6 months. R 5A was, in fact, applicable to a misdemeanor that was late or sometimes absent from duty for which the penalty was presented for only one year without any cumulative effect to prevent the increase. The service tribunal held that in the case of the employee, who was deliberately absent duty for R5A for 6 months and could be fined only for one year, he was not correct where the employee Was absent from duty for 6 months, the dismissal by the department was a reasonable punishment and the sentence cannot be considered rigorous. The reasons given by the service tribunal for changing the termination of employment for 6 months were not appropriate and such reasons could be presented arbitrarily. Was set aside and the employment dismissal restored to the situation advocate from Mustang lawyer