Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

MUNSHI NEMAT ULLAH PATWARI versus STATE


Section 4 reads with the Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974), Section 16 is spent on duty with the payee out of employment due to mismanagement due to allegations made by the service tribunal.

1980 P L C (C. S.) 536

[Service Tribunal Punjab]

Present: M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman, S. Hafeez‑ur‑Rehman and Zawar Hussain Malik, Members

Munshi NEMAT ULLAH PATWARI

Versus

STATE AND OTHERS

Appeal No. 252 of 1979, decided on 16th March, 1980.

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑

-----S. 4 read with Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974), S. 16-- Dismissal on account of misconduct‑Accused found by Service Tribunal guilty of mere irregularity‑Penalty altered to reduction of pay by four stages‑Penalty found sufficient to meet ends of justice Intervening period of being out of service‑Treated as spent on duty with entitlement to salary.

JUDGMENT

M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).‑

The appellant has moved era application dated 7‑2‑1980 for a clarification as to the entitlement of his salary.

2. We find that section 16 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act which relates to the terms and conditions of service of civil servants, lays down that the authority setting aside the order of dismissal or removal from service is required to determine the arrears of pay to which the civil servant concerned shall be entitled to draw. In this case, we have held that the appellant was guilty of mere irregularity for which he has already been punished by reducing his salary by four stages. In over view the aforesaid punishment is sufficient to meet the ends of justice.

3. As already held by us in Appeal No. 8/105 of 1975 In re : Shahbaz Cheema N. Commissioner, Sargodha, the appellant is entitled to be treated on duty for the period he remained out of service. We accordingly direct that the appellant is entitled to the salary admissible to him.

Appeal allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
famous lower court advocate from Upper Deval lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.