PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Special Secretary, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Lahore vs KHADIM HUSSAIN ABBASI Ss — 2021 PLC(CS) 1531 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2021 PLC(CS) 1531 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2021
Reporter
PLC
Parties
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Special Secretary, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Lahore vs KHADIM HUSSAIN ABBASI Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 5; Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Special Secretary, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Lahore VS KHADIM HUSSAIN ABBASI Ss. 4(1)(b)(iv) & 4(1)(b)(iii)---Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 5(1)---Misconduct, absence from duty without leave and tampering of record---Major penalty of compulsory retirement from service imposed by departmental authorities---Tribunal converting major penalty of compulsory retirement from service into minor penalty of forfeiture of past service for a period of two years---Legality---Inquiry was conducted against the respondent in which he was found guilty of all charges---Only defence taken by the respondent before the Tribunal was that the punishment may be reduced from major penalty to a minor penalty---No effort whatsoever was made to deny or contest the charges against the respondent, which constituted admission of charges of a very serious nature---Tribunal for reasons best known to it choose to ignore such a vital and material aspect of the case and found there was absence of "tangible material" against the respondent---Tribunal did not bother to elaborate how the process against the respondent was "unfair" or "lacked transparency"----Although the respondent had been acquitted of the criminal charges, it did not have any bearing on the independent inquiry conducted by the Department and clear and categorical findings of the departmental authorities holding the respondent guilty of the charges levelled against him---In converting the major penalty of compulsory retirement from service into a minor penalty of forfeiture of past service for a period of two years, the Tribunal had failed to assign any cogent, legally sustainable and valid reasons to support its finding---Appeal was allowed, impugned judgment of Tribunal was set-aside and the penalty of compulsory retirement from service imposed on the respondent by departmental authorities was restored. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1531 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Special Secretary, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Lahore VS KHADIM HUSSAIN ABBASI Concurrent departmental proceedings and criminal prosecution---Scope---Acquittal in criminal case---Effect---Departmental proceedings and criminal prosecution were not mutually exclusive, and could proceed independently---Acquittal in criminal proceedings did not affect the outcome of the departmental proceedings---In contrast to criminal proceedings, the departmental proceedings were undertaken under a different set of laws, were subject to different procedural requirements and were based upon different evidentiary principles and a different threshold of proof was to be met---Therefore, acquittal in criminal proceedings could not and did not automatically knock off the outcome of the departmental proceedings if all legal and procedural formalities and due process had been followed independently. Citation Name: 2021 PLC(CS) 1531 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Special Secretary, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Lahore VS KHADIM HUSSAIN ABBASI S. 5(1)---Quantum of punishment---Provincial Service Tribunal, discretion of---Scope---Although the Service Tribunal had the discretion to interfere in questions of quantum of punishment, such discretion could neither be arbitrarily and capriciously exercised nor were powers of the Tribunal unqualified or unlimited---Where the Tribunal exercised its discretion to interfere in the penalty awarded by the competent authorities, such discretion had to be exercised in a circumscribed, restricted, carefully calibrated and structured manner duly supported by legally sustainable reasoning.

Other judgments reported in 2021 PLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English