| Case ID |
2095e3e6-9ddb-4755-bdc9-d7074390adac |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Petition No. 380-K of 1985 |
| Decision Date |
Aug 27, 1986 |
| Hearing Date |
Aug 27, 1986 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by Abdul Hamid against the order of his compulsory retirement by the Sind Service Tribunal. The court held that the petitioner had been given adequate notice regarding the charges of gross negligence and inefficiency. The inquiry established that the petitioner was guilty of these charges, which justified the penalty imposed. The court found no merit in the petitioner's claims that he had been prejudiced by the disciplinary process, as he was informed of the nature of the charges and the potential penalties he faced. The decision of the Sind Service Tribunal was upheld, affirming the principle that a civil servant can receive a lesser penalty than initially proposed if the circumstances warrant it. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as lacking in substantive legal grounds. |
| Summary |
In the case of Abdul Hamid vs. Sind Service Tribunal, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed issues surrounding the compulsory retirement of a civil servant under the Sind Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973. The case arose from allegations of gross negligence and inefficiency in the management of property within the District Court Larkana. The petitioner contended that the charges were unfounded and that the disciplinary proceedings had unfairly prejudiced his defense. The court analyzed the procedural aspects of the inquiry and the merits of the charges against the petitioner, ultimately concluding that the disciplinary actions were justified. This case highlights the importance of proper notice and the procedural rights of civil servants in disciplinary matters, as well as the court's role in reviewing administrative decisions. The ruling reinforces the standards of accountability within public service and clarifies the application of efficiency and discipline rules in civil service employment. Key phrases such as 'Sind Civil Servants', 'disciplinary proceedings', and 'Supreme Court of Pakistan' are essential for understanding the implications and context of this decision. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Muhammad Afzal Zullah,
S.A. Nusrat,
Ali Hussain Qazilbash
|
| Lawyers |
Rashid Akhtar Qureshi
|
| Petitioners |
Abdul Hamid
|
| Respondents |
others,
Sind Service Tribunal
|
| Citations |
1986 SLD 997,
1986 SCMR 1840
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973),
Sind Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973
|
| Sections |
Art. 212(3),
S.4,
Rr.2,
R.3,
R.4
|