Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 190‑R of 1986, decided on 15th October, 1986.
(On appeal from the order Federal Service Tribunal of Pakistan Camp at Lahore, dated 18th May, 1986 in Appeal No. 410‑L of 1983)
‑‑‑Art. 212(3)‑‑West Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Act (XXXI of 1958), S.17‑A‑‑Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.5‑‑Misconduct‑‑Removal from service‑‑Alteration .of punishment by Service Tribunal in appeal‑‑WAPDA employee, found guilty of grave misconduct‑‑Removal from service‑‑Service Tribunal altering his punishment to that of retirement from service despite holding that he was not a fit person to remain in service of WAPDA‑‑Plea raised that it was against public policy to alter punishment awarded to respondent in circumstances of case and that discretion had been exercised by Tribunal arbitrarily‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider inter alia whether in circumstances, Tribunal was justified in giving benefit of retirement to WAPDA employee by altering punishment of removal.
Muhammad Sadiq Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Respondent in person.
Date of hearing: 15th October, 1986.
Shujaat Ali Baghdadi respondent had appealed against the order of his removal from service. The appeal was barred by time but the Federal Service Tribunal condoned the delay and proceeded to decide his appeal on merits. The findings of the Tribunal were that from the record it was evident that the respondent had made wild allegations against the Chief Engineer and other members of the staff. He blackmailed various officers including lady workers and for that reason he was even arrested by Martial Law authorities. He is stated to have insulted the modesty of Miss Rafia Butt and criminally intimidated and threatened her of dire consequences. The Tribunal observed that the record of the respondent showed a black picture. He was suspended for misconduct but was then re‑instated. He blackmailed an officer and created Sindhi‑Punjabi issue. He was in the habit of sending filthy letters to officers and using dirty language. He used to make anxious calls to the officers and he impersonated as a Military Officer to threaten his superiors. On the basis of this evidence on record the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that he was not a fit person who should be allowed to remain in service of the WAPDA. But in spite of it the Tribunal accepted his appeal to the extent that the order of removal was altered to that of retirement from service.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it was against public policy to alter the punishment awarded to the respondent in the circumstances of the case and that the discretion had been exercised arbitrarily by the Tribunal since it has been passing contradictory judgments in regards to the alteration of punishment.
We grant leave inter alia to consider as to whether the Tribunal in the circumstances of this case was justified in giving the benefit of retirement to the respondent and thus altering the punishment of removal. The suspension of impugned order is to continue pending the disposal of the appeal.
M.I. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer