| Case ID |
1a178c3c-c643-4bbb-9755-5c7ff56fa9f5 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No.37 of 1988 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 10, 1990 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that Fundamental Rule 18 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 is still applicable and has not become otiose due to the introduction of the Civil Servants Act. The court emphasized that the rule provides that after five years of continuous absence from duty, a government servant ceases to be in government employment unless otherwise determined by the Governor-General. In this case, the appellant, Mst. Maryam Yunus, had been absent for over five years and her name was rightly struck off from the civil service employees list. The court affirmed that the failure to provide a notice prior to the adverse action was not fatal since the statutory rule is self-executing. The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the legal principle that the procedure laid down in the Fundamental Rules must be followed unless there is a specific statutory requirement to the contrary. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Civil Appeal No.37 of 1988, the Supreme Court of Pakistan deliberated on the applicability of Fundamental Rule 18 under the Civil Servants Act, 1973, concerning the employment status of government servants who have been absent from duty for an extended period. The court examined whether the provisions of the Civil Servants Act and the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 had rendered Fundamental Rule 18 obsolete. The appellant, Mst. Maryam Yunus, had taken leave due to personal circumstances, but her absence exceeded five years, leading the authorities to strike her name from the civil service list. The Supreme Court ruled that the Fundamental Rule 18 remains valid and applicable, emphasizing that the absence of a mandatory show-cause notice before taking adverse action does not invalidate the procedure followed under the rule. This decision has significant implications for civil servants regarding their employment rights and the procedural requirements for termination due to prolonged absence. The ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to established legal frameworks while balancing the principles of natural justice. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Government of Pakistan
|
| Judges |
SHAFIUR RAHMAN,
ABDUL QUDEER CHAUDHRY,
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA
|
| Lawyers |
Bashir Ahmad Ansari,
Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan,
Muhammad ANA Siddiqui,
Ch. Akhtar Ali
|
| Petitioners |
Mst. MARYAM YUNUS
|
| Respondents |
,
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CANTONMENT, G.H.Q RAWALPINDI
|
| Citations |
1990 SLD 168,
1990 PLD 666
|
| Other Citations |
PLD 1971 Kar. 234,
1971 SCMR 681,
PLD 1959 Kar. 669,
PLD 1971 Peshawar 210,
PLD 1964 SC 410,
PLD 1967 SC 62,
PLD 1971 SC 124
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Servants Act, 1973,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
Preamble,
25(21),
18,
212(3)
|