Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.646 of 1979, decided on 30th November, 1980.

(On appeal against the order of Service Tribunal (Central) Lahore dated 15‑5‑1979 passed in Appeal No.72(L)/1977.)

‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4‑‑Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958), S.17(1‑A)‑‑Power of WAPDA to remove its employee from service‑‑Contention that provision of S.17(1‑A) of WAPDA Act cannot be used for purpose of circumventing procedure prescribed under Efficiency and Discipline Rules‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider import of S.17(1‑A) of WAPDA Act and to give an authoritative decision thereon.‑‑[Civil service].

Allah Wasaya Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Choudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 30th November, 1980.

.‑‑ The petitioner, an employee of WAPDA was removed from service w.e.f. 15‑6‑1977 under section 17 (1‑A) of the WAPDA Act, 1958 by giving him 30 days pay in lieu of notice but without assigning any reason. An inquiry is said to have been conducted against an Executive Engineer and S.D.O. in connection with irregulari ties committed by them in the opening and processing of tenders for the purchase of stores. Since the petitioner was responsible for the maintenance of Accounts and Record, connected with the stores in question, action was contemplated against him also. Instead, however, of taking action under the Efficiency & Discipline Rules against the petitioner which would have entitled him to have clarified his position before the Inquiry Officer, report was taken to the provisions of section 17 (1‑A). The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the Authority of WAPDA under section 17 (1‑A) is absolute to remove any WAPDA employee from service after giving 30 days', notice or pay in lieu thereof without assigning any reason."

2. It has also been contended that the Saleh‑ud‑Din, the main accused in the tenders' case who had also been removed under section 17 (1‑A) has been re‑instated. It is submitted that the provisions of section 17 (1‑A) cannot be used for the purpose of circumventing the procedure prescribed under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules. Leave is granted to consider the import of section 17 (1‑A) of the WAPDA Act and to give an authoritative decision on that.

S. Q. Leave granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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