' MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN, J.-- 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 irregularities 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 A 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.