Pakistan Case Law← Search
1989 SCMR 2024

PAKISTAN through Secretary, Government of Pakistan and 2 others vs NISAR

Citation1989 SCMR 2024
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No, 346-R of 1988
Date1989-05-31
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Dr. Javed Iqbal, Syed Usman Ali Shah
ResultLeave granted

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought; against the acceptance by the Federal Service Tribunal, of respondent's service appeal. It had arisen out of an order of his compulsory retirement.

2. ' Although questions of non-reading and misreading of evidence and some other questions have been raised in the main petition, the learned Deputy Attorney-General after some arguments, submitted an application for permission to take up additional pleas which reads as follows:- "That on going through the entire case, it appears that certain important questions of law of general public importance can be raised in addition to the questions already raised in the main petition. In the interest of justice, petitioner may graciously be permitted to raise following questions of law:-

(1) The Tribunal did not set aside finding of Enquiry Committee in its entirety but only objected to the procedure thereof. The objection was to the effect that the Enquiry Committee failed to inspect the spot, so as to ascertain the merits of the charges.

3. ' It is submitted that in such a case, the Tribunal ought to have remanded the case to the Inquiry Committee to inspect the spot and give a fresh finding on the charges after further enquiry. This would be in accord with law declared by this Hon'ble Court in Mohammad Yameen's case.

(2) That the second question of law is that since the Tribunal took into consideration involvement of other officials in the matter, whether the Tribunal should not have ascertained as to action taken against the other officials so as to determine the effect thereof on the case of the respondent.

4. ' It is, therefore, humbly prayed that petitioner be allowed to amend the main petition so as to take up the abovenoted points."

5. ' The request for amendment of the petition is reasonable. It is allowed.

6. ' The points raised from the petitioners' side including those in the application for amendment, require examination. Leave to appeal is, accordingly, granted. The impugned judgment is suspended meanwhile.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search