Pakistan Case Law← Search
1991 SCMR 381

MUHAMMAD AZAM vs PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION

Citation1991 SCMR 381
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No.281-R of 1989 Appeal No.43/R of 1987
Date1990-01-29
Judge(s)Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, Syed Usman Ali Shah
ResultLeave refused

ORDER

ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioner was employed as a Sanitation Worker at the Islamabad Airport in 1970. He was dismissed from service by the respondent on the ground of habitual absence from duty. His departmental appeal was rejected on 27-10-1986. The petitioner challenged the order of his dismissal before the Service Tribunal. The Service Tribunal partly allowed the appeal and converted the penalty of dismissal to that of compulsory retirement.

2. The petitioner was absent from duty for a period of 51 days during the year 1985. A Show-Cause Notice was given to him to which he replied that his mother was sick, therefore, he had to go to look after her. He also sent an application for grant of leave to the authorities. It has been conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no such application was brought on record by the petitioner.

3. The Service Tribunal observed as hereunder:-- "On merits, we find that the appellant, during the inquiry, accepted the allegations and also waived the requirement of formal departmental inquiry. At the time of personal hearing also he accepted that he was unauthorisedly absent from duty. Though he now says that the absence was due to his mother's illness but that version has not been proved by him. The absence being of broken periods and not continuous, the plea of the illness of the mother on the face of it appears to be an afterthought. We in these circumstances are convinced that the appellant wilfully absented himself for 51 days during the year 1985 and as such was rightly found guilty of misconduct."

4. The finding of the Service Tribunal is not open to any exception. He was habitual defaulter and the plea of ailment of his mother was rightly rejected by the Service Tribunal.

5. No point of law is involved in this petition. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused and the petition is dismissed.

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