' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The Federation of Pakistan has appealed under Article 203-F of the Constitution against a judgment of the Federal Shariat Court dated the 27th of March, 1984 delivered while examining Rig motu the various Federal Acts and Ordinances under Article 203-D of the Constitution.
2. The specific law in respect of which the finding of the Federal Shariat Court has aggrieved the appellant is the Islamic University Ordinance, 1980 (Ord.No, LIII of 1980) (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance). Its subsection (6) provides as follows.
"(6) The Chancellor may remove any person from the membership of any Authority, if such person-
(i) has become of unsound mind; or
(ii) has become subject to an incapacity which prevents him from functioning as a member of such Authority; or
(iii) has been convicted by a Court of law of an offence involving moral turpitude; or
(iv) leaves Pakistan for more than one year."
' The Federal Shariat Court while scrutinising this provision observed as hereunder-- ' Subsection (6) of section 8 provides for removal of a person from the membership of any Authority on the grounds given therein but it does not provide for show-cause notice, before action is taken. Such a provision shall be added in subsection (6) of section 8."
3. The learned counsel for the Federation has contended that the contents of subsection (6) of section 8 of the Ordinance are wholly Islamic and that no Injunction of Islam has been cited to which it can be said to be repugnant. The contention is that there is absolutely no warrant in law requiring show-cause notice before taking action of the type stated in subsection (6) of section 8 of the Act, and that no declaration could be given in the impugned judgment and the amendment suggested.
4. The requirement of a show-cause notice, of the disclosure of the grounds on which action is proposed to be taken and of an opportunity of hearing to the person concerned against whom an action is required to be taken was considered at great length in our judgment in Pakistan v. Public at Large (PLD 1987 SC 304). For the same reasons we consider that the disclosure of such a ground is necessary and its absence or omission from a statute is repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam.
5. We find that the decision given by the Fereral Shariat Court impugned before us is well-founded and consistent with the decision of the Shariat Appellate Bench of this Court with regard to all service or employment with the Government or on public posts. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.