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

SOFIA WAQAR KHATTAK vs The Hon'ble PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Rr — 2024 PLC(CS) 1302 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2024 PLC(CS) 1302 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
PLC
Parties
SOFIA WAQAR KHATTAK vs The Hon'ble PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Rr
Subject matter
Service
Provisions referred to
S. 5---D; Pakhtunkhwa Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act (VIII of 1991)

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

SOFIA WAQAR KHATTAK VS The Hon'ble PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR Rr.5(1) & 11---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act (VIII of 1991), S.5---Departmental inquiry---Dispensing with the requirement of regular inquiry---Scope---Allegation of illegal/irregular appointment---Issuance of second show cause notice after amendment in the earlier show-cause notice---Ambiguity in the record about assessing the eligibility of the appointee and none of the accused officers found involved in the fact finding inquiry---Deficiency of documentary evidence and procedural fairness---Effect---Appointment, the domain of appointing authority---Appointing Authority did not have sufficient material available on record to have formed an opinion that there was no need of initiation of regular enquiry into the case of the appellant---Competent Authority was within its right to dispense with departmental enquiry in terms of R.5(1) of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government Servants (E&D) Rules, 2011 (Rules) when there was sufficient material available which prima facie connected the accused with the commission of misconduct; while in the instant case, the material, so produced, was deficient in all respects and an opinion could not be legally formed to justify the dispensation of regular enquiry---Powers of the Competent Authority could not be called in question to dispense with the enquiry, however, in the instant case, neither there was documentary evidence against the appellant, nor any satisfactory reasons had been recorded, thus, the appellant was not provided sufficient chance to vindicate herself against the allegations---Penalty imposed upon the appellant was set aside with the observation that if respondents had sufficient material against the appellant they may proceed against her after following the procedure as provided in R.11 of the Rules---Service Appeal was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC

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