Categories Courts Service Matter

SC Rules for Fair Inquiries: Fired Worker Gets Another Chance through De Novo Trial

ISLAMABAD – Top court has given a new chance to a government worker who was fired after a dispute over his attendance. In a major decision, the court ruled that employees accused of wrongdoing have an absolute right to question the witnesses against them. The two-judge bench, consisting of Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musarrat Hilali, emphasized that this is a fundamental principle of a fair process. The court set aside the worker’s firing and ordered a fresh inquiry, stating that the previous one was flawed because the worker was not allowed to properly defend himself.

The case began with Muhammad Abid, a Naib Qasid in the Excise & Taxation Department. In 2011, an anonymous complaint was filed against him, leading to a five-month-long inquiry. Although he was cleared of the charges, his salary was withheld. This forced him to go to the Peshawar High Court, which ordered his salary to be released on November 28, 2017.

Abid claimed that in retaliation, an officer in the department seized his attendance register to create a false record of his absence. The department then sent him a letter on October 10, 2017, demanding an explanation for his alleged absence since October 3, 2017, even though he insists he was at work. A new inquiry was conducted, which Abid considered biased, and he was fired on November 8, 2018. His appeals to the departmental and service tribunals were unsuccessful, leading him to the Supreme Court.

According to verdict in the matter, the top court focused on two main legal points: the purpose of a show-cause notice and the right to cross-examine witnesses. A show-cause notice is a formal letter giving a person a chance to explain their side of the story before any action is taken against them. The court called this a “sine qua non” (a necessary condition) for a fair process.

The core of the judgment, however, was about cross-examination. The judges declared that an employee’s right to question the witnesses against them is an “inalienable and undeniable” right, meaning it cannot be taken away. The court said that without this right, the accused is deprived of a proper defense. The judges explained that cross-examination is the most important tool to find the truth and check if a witness’s testimony is trustworthy. They warned that without it, a witness might be making false claims due to personal grudges, and the entire inquiry would be legally flawed.

As a result, the court not only canceled Abid’s termination but also ordered a “de novo” (new) inquiry to be completed within three months. The payment of his back benefits will depend on the outcome of this new inquiry, in which he is required to participate.

Author

Khudayar Mohla, Managing Partner Mohla & Mohla, Founder of the Law Today Pakistan,

Managing Partner at Mohla & Mohla - Advocates and Legal Consultants, Islamabad, Founder of The Law Today Pakistan (TLTP) Newswire Service. Former President Press Association of Supreme Court of Pakistan with over two decades of coverage of defining judicial moments - including the dissolution and restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Asif Ali Zardari NAB cases, Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani contempt proceedings, Panama Papers case against Mian Nawaz Sharif, matters involving Imran Khan, and the high treason trial of former Army Chief and President Pervez Musharraf. He now practises law and teaches Jurisprudence, International Law, and Civil and Criminal Law. Contact: mohla@lawtoday.com.pk

More From Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Punjab Judicial Academy, Justice Aalia Neelum, Lahore High Court, PJA Board Meeting, first female Chairperson PJA, judicial training Punjab, judicial reforms Pakistan, Punjab Judicial Academy Act 2007, Section 4 PJA Act, judicial officers training, court personnel training, court management training, case management Punjab, delay reduction techniques, alternate dispute resolution training, judgment writing training, judicial administration Punjab, legal education Pakistan, Sardar Ahmed Naeem, Justice Sajid Mehmood Sethi, Justice Jawad Hassan, Amjad Iqbal Ranjha, Lahore news, judicial capacity building, Federal Judicial Academy collaboration, legal research Punjab, judicial ethics training, law and development Punjab, legislative drafting training, PJA conferences seminars workshops.

Chief Justice LHC Justice Miss Aalia Neelum Chairs PJA Board Meeting, Marks Historic First for Academy

LAHORE – Days ago the Punjab Judicial Academy marked a significant milestone when Chief Justice…

Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), 27th Constitutional Amendment, FCC commences operations, judicial arena, Islamabad High Court (IHC), FCC judges oath-taking, Justice Rozi Khan Barrech, Justice Arshad Hussain Shah, Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan, courtrooms arranged, logistical issues, teething problems, IHC Courtroom No. 2, Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, FCC high-profile cases, amenity plots case, Sindh High Court (SHC) judgment stayed, Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC), public-interest case, IHC relocation, Red Zone difficulties, Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, superior judiciary Pakistan, structural change judicial framework.

Federal Constitutional Court Opens in IHC Building, Ushering in New Post-27th Amendment Judicial Order

ISLAMABAD – The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) finally commenced operations on Monday, marking the first…

Lahore High Court, 27th Constitutional Amendment, challenged, judicial independence, Muhammad Azhar Siddique, Munir Ahmed, Mian Shabbir Ismail, basic structure violation, Supreme Court original jurisdiction, Federal Constitutional Court, abolition of Supreme Court powers, 1973 Constitution, judicial history distortion, compromise of judiciary, legislative transparency, lack of public debate, void amendment, stay on implementation.

Constitutionality of 27th Amendment Challenged in LHC

LAHORE – Invoking jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court – petitioners challenged legality of the…