Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 1384 of 1983, decided on 28th January. 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment dated 1‑10‑1983 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Civil Revision No. 217/D of 1980).

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Disciplinary proceedings against employee of educational institution‑‑Concept of "reasonable opportunity"‑‑Leave to appeal granted to examine question of general public importance whether some principles, as laid down by Supreme Court vis‑a‑vis students can be extended also to case of employees of educational forums. ‑‑[Educational institutions].

Muhammad Saddiq Javid Chaudhry v. Government of West Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 393 and Ahmad & others v. Vice‑Chancellor, University of Engineering & Technology & another P L D 1981 S C 464 ref.:

Ch. Muhammd Farooq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

A.K. Dogar, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 28th January, 1984,

A complaint was lodged against the respondent who was working as a Senior Clerk under the Board of Intermediate & Secondary Education, Sargodha and was still to complete his probation, that he had received a sum of Rs. 450 as illegal gratifica tion to help one Sarfraz secure a high division in the Board examination, although he was failing in all the subjects. A preliminary inquiry was held into this allegation during the course of which the respondent also appeared, wherein the above charge was found to be established. A show‑cause notice was, therefore, issued to the respondent, who, in his reply, denied the allegation and also asked for an opportunity to produce evidence and controvert that allegations levelled against him. However, after receipt of his reply, no further proceedings were taken and the services of the respondent were terminated. This order was challenged by him by a civil suit, which was dismissed. The appeal against the said judgment also failed, but, on revision, a learned Single Judge of the High Court held that even the services of a probationer is terminated on the ground of misconduct, the same will amount to removal or dismissal and a reasonable opportunity must be afforded to him to show‑cause against such severance from service. In this connection, reliance was placed on Muhammad Siddiq Javid Chaudhry v. Government of West Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 393.

2. The main argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner‑Board is that the concept of "reasonable opportunity" to be afforded to persons being dealt with by the Educational Institutions and educational Bodies is to be viewed differently than is taken, when considering the cases of the employees of other Government and statutory organizations. In this connection, reliance is placed on a recent judgment of this Court in the case of Ahmad & others v. Vice‑Chancellor, University of Engineering & Technology & another P L D 1981 S C 464, wherein it was observed that an educational institution is neither required to act as a criminal Court nor is bound to follow the legal or procedural formalities of such a Court, while the student is being dealt with for misconduct or indiscipline, he is not to be treated as an ordinary criminal nor the authorities are to get into the robes of the police prosecuting agency. During the investigation and inquires, preliminary or final, the attitude of all concerned is not necessary of adversaries and during the inquiry involving a student and other concerned persons, the method of questioning, discussion and/or confrontation if he must be in a healthy atmosphere and if proceeding in such matters is conducted in this manner, they would neither be illegal nor improper.

3. Mr. A.K. Dogar, appearing in support of the caveat filed by the respondent, submits that the observations made above were made by this Court while dealing with the case of students charged with misconduct. But in so far as employees of educational or any other statutory or Government organisation is concerned, they were all to be treated on the same footings, in matters of disciplinary proceedings.

4. Ch. Muhammad Farooq, learned counsel for the Board, however, submitted that the intention underlying the law laid down by this Court is that educational forums should not be dragged into litigation and where substantial justice has been done in a case, the absence of a full‑fledged enquiry would not vitiate the order passed since a uniform principle would apply in relation to their dealings both with students as also their employees where a fair opportunity has been afforded to the accused‑party to state his point of view and he has not been materially prejudiced, the grant of such an opportunity should be considered to be a "reasonable opportunity" visualised by the relevant law.

5. The question whether the same principles, as laid down by this Court vis‑a‑vis the students can be extended also to the case of employees of educational forums, is a matter of general public importance and needs examination.

6. We would, accordingly, grant leave to appeal in this case.

7. The appeal to be made ready on the present record, with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if any and shall be put up for hearing within this year.

8. In the meanwhile, the operation of the impugned judgment of the High Court shall remain suspended.

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.