JUNAID WAZIR vs SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE S — 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURT

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

JUNAID WAZIR VS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE S. 21---Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4---Police Rules, 1934, R. 12.21---Police official---Order of discharge from service under Rule 12.21 of Police Rules, 1934---Departmental appeal---Whether a departmental appeal could be filed against the order of discharge from service under Rule 12.21 of Police Rules, 1934---After the petitioner was discharged from service under the Rule 12.21, he filed a departmental appeal, which was rejected being not maintainable under said Rule---Petitioner filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal, which was dismissed on the point of limitation---Entire emphasis of the Tribunal was on the fact that, instead of filing a service appeal before the Tribunal, the petitioner filed a departmental appeal before the DIG of Police, which was not appealable before the department in terms of Rule 12.21---Validity---Although no right of appeal against the ,discharge from service is provided under Rule 12.21 of the Police Rules, 1934 but at the same time, one cannot ignore the niceties of section 21 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 wherein it is clearly spelled out that if no provision for appeal or review exists, a civil servant aggrieved by any such order may make a representation to the authority next above the authority which made the order---Likewise, the nitty-gritties of Section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 explicate that where an appeal, review or representation to a departmental authority is provided under the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, or any rules, against any such order no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal unless the aggrieved civil servant has preferred an appeal of application for review or representation to such departmental authority---In the present case the petitioner filed the departmental appeal and was only non-suited on the ground that no appeal lies against the discharge, but the departmental authority failed to consider that against the order of discharge, representation was maintainable---Departmental Authority should have seen the pith and substance of the grievance lodged by the petitioner rather than focusing solely on the nomenclature of the representation---Both the departmental authority and the Tribunal failed to take into account that if a right of appeal or review was not provided in Rule 12.21 then, in unison, it does not debar or prohibit the civil servant from electing the remedy of filing a representation as of right, which could not be turned down on hyper-technical grounds but should have been decided on merits, rather than rejecting it being non-maintainable as an appeal instead of representation---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed; the impugned judgment was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority (department) where petitioner's appeal shall be deemed to be pending, which shall be treated as a representation under section 21(2) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, and the same shall be decided strictly in accordance with law after due notice to the parties. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case JUNAID WAZIR VS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE Maxim 'ex debito justitiae'---Meaning and scope---Legal maxim "ex debito justitiae" means as a matter of right or what a person is entitled to as of right---This maxim applies to the remedies that the court is bound to give when they are claimed as distinct from those that it has discretion to grant---Power of a courts to act ex debito justitiae is an inherent power of courts to fix procedural errors. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case JUNAID WAZIR VS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE Natural justice, principles of---Right of accused to be heard---Rational and impartial decision making---Principles of natural justice require that the delinquent should be afforded a fair opportunity to converge, explain and contest the claims against him before he is found guilty and condemned---Principles of natural justice and fair-mindedness are grounded in the philosophy of affording a right of audience before any detrimental action is taken, in tandem with its ensuing constituent that the foundation of any adjudication or order of a quasi-judicial authority, statutory body or any departmental authority regulated under some law must be rational and impartial and the decision maker has an adequate amount of decision making independence and the reasons of the decision arrived at should be amply well-defined, just, right and understandable. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case JUNAID WAZIR VS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE Incorrect provision of law cited---Even mentioning an incorrect provision of law does not debar or relieve the competent authority from examining the case according to the remedy provided under the law to an aggrieved civil servant. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case JUNAID WAZIR VS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE Public functionaries are supposed to execute and perform their duty in good faith, honestly and within the precincts of their legally recognized powers so that the person concerned may be treated in accordance with law.

JUNAID WAZIR vs SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRU/ DOLPHIN POLICE, LAHORE S — 2024 PLC(CS) 211 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC