Peeda | The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the Punjab Employees Social Security Institution and affirmed the decision of the High Court, dismissing Javed Iqbal under Section 4(1)(b)(vi) of the PEDA Act (XII of 2006). Ordered reinstatement with effect from date and payment of all due benefits, as the allegations leveled against him had no solid basis and his performance was deemed satisfactory. 2024 S C M R 559

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the Punjab Employees Social Security Institution and affirmed the decision of the High Court, dismissing Javed Iqbal under Section 4(1)(b)(vi) of the PEDA Act (XII of 2006). Ordered reinstatement with effect from date and payment of all due benefits, as the allegations leveled against him had no solid basis and his performance was deemed satisfactory.

2024 S C M R 559

کیس 2024 SCMR 559 میں پنجاب ایمپلائیز سوشل سیکیورٹی انسٹیٹیوشن (PESSI) نے ایک قرارداد کے ذریعے جاوید اقبال، جو کہ ایک معاہدہ ملازم ہیں، کی بحالی کے خلاف سپریم کورٹ میں اپیل دائر کی۔

فیصلہ کے اہم نکات:

1. پس منظر: جاوید اقبال کو PESSI سے برطرف کر دیا گیا تھا، جس کے خلاف انہوں نے ہائی کورٹ میں درخواست دائر کی۔ لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے انہیں بحال کر دیا، جس پر PESSI نے سپریم کورٹ میں اپیل کی۔

2. ملازم کے خلاف الزامات: برطرفی کے اسباب میں ملازم کی کارکردگی اور ڈیوٹی کے اوقات کی پابندی نہ کرنے کے الزامات شامل تھے۔ تاہم سپریم کورٹ نے یہ بات تسلیم کی کہ:

کارکردگی کے الزامات کے لیے کوئی ٹھوس ثبوت نہیں تھا، کیونکہ ملازم کی ذاتی تشخیص رپورٹیں 2009 سے 2020 تک تسلی بخش تھیں۔

ریکارڈ میں یہ واضح نہیں تھا کہ ملازم کب دفتر میں وقت پر حاضر نہیں ہوا، جس سے یہ ثابت ہوتا ہے کہ وہ اپنے فرائض کو اچھی طرح نبھاتا رہا۔

3. بد نیتی کا عنصر: عدالت نے یہ بھی نوٹ کیا کہ ملازم کے خلاف کارروائیاں بد نیتی پر مبنی لگتی ہیں، خاص طور پر اس بات کے مدنظر کہ پابندیاں اس وقت لگائی گئیں جب ملازم نے قانونی درخواستیں دائر کیں۔

4. ہائی کورٹ کا فیصلہ: ہائی کورٹ کا فیصلہ کہ جاوید اقبال کو برطرفی کی تاریخ سے بحال کیا جائے، اور ان کے تمام واجب الادا حقوق ادا کیے جائیں، کو برقرار رکھا گیا۔ عدالت نے PESSI کو ہدایت دی کہ وہ جاوید اقبال کی خدمات کو باقاعدہ بنانے کے لیے ضروری کاروائی مکمل کرے اور یہ معاملہ چھ ماہ کے اندر طے کرے۔

5. نتیجہ: سپریم کورٹ نے PESSI کی درخواستیں خارج کر دیں اور ہائی کورٹ کے فیصلے کی توثیق کی۔

قانونی مضمرات:

یہ فیصلہ اس بات کی وضاحت کرتا ہے کہ کسی ملازم کی برطرفی سے قبل مکمل تفتیش ضروری ہے اور الزامات کی حمایت کے لیے واضح اور دستاویزی ثبوت ہونا ضروری ہے۔ اس کے علاوہ، یہ معاہدہ ملازمین کے ساتھ انصاف کے اصول کو بھی اجاگر کرتا ہے۔

اگر آپ کے پاس اس فیصلے کے بارے میں مزید سوالات ہیں یا کسی خاص پہلو پر مزید تفصیل چاہتے ہیں تو بلا جھجھک پوچھیں!

2024 S C M R 559

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Amin-ud-Din Khan and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, JJ

The PUNJAB EMPLOYEES SOCIAL SECURITY INSTITUTION, LAHORE through Commissioner and others---Petitioner/Applicants

Versus

JAVED IQBAL and others---Respondents

Civil Petition No. 2007-L of 2023, C.M.A. No. 2782-L of 2023 in

C.P. No.2007-L of 2023, C.P. No.2008-L of 2023 and C.M.A. No.4417-L of 2023 in C.P. No.2008-L of 2023, decided on 18th January, 2024.

(Against judgment dated 30.03.2023, passed by the Lahore

High Court, Lahore in Writ Petitions Nos.33961 of 2022 and 178510 of 2018)

Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)---

----S. 4(1)(b)(vi)---Contractual employee of Punjab Employees Social Security Institution, Lahore (the PESSI)---Reinstatement in service from date of dismissal with all back benefits---With regard to the allegation levelled against the respondent (employee) regarding his poor performance from 06.11.2011 to 21.08.2020, the fate of the said allegation could only be decided after conducting a thorough probe/regular enquiry---Said allegation stood belied from the remarks recorded by the Reporting Officer in the Personal Evaluation Reports of the respondent from the years 2009 to 2020, wherein his performance had been shown as satisfactory---Conduct of the petitioners (departmental authorities) established mala fide on their part to dispense with the services of the respondent as all penal actions against the respondent were initiated by them after filing of writ petitions and contempt petitions/applications by the respondent---As regards the allegation against the respondent of not following duty timings properly, it was apparent from the record that without specifying days when the respondent did not attend the office on time supported the plea of the respondent that he performed his duties to the entire satisfaction of his superiors---Moreover, the Reporting Officer while recording the remarks in the column of "Punctuality" did not give any adverse remarks against the respondent---Last allegation in the show cause notice that despite previous enquiries initiated against the respondent his behaviour remained very irresponsible during his service, no incident or untoward situation during the service of the respondent had been pointed out or referred to by the petitioners---High Court rightly reinstated the respondent in service from the date of his dismissal with all back benefits, and gave directions to the departmental authorities to take up the matter regarding regularization of services of the respondent with the relevant authority and upon fulfilment of codal formalities to ensure decision within a period of six months positively---Petitions were dismissed and leave was refused.

Aftab Raheem, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Shoaib Tabish, Law Officer (via video link from Lahore) for Petitioner/ Applicants (in both cases).

M. Irian Khan Ghaznavi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No. 1 (in both cases).

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.