Islamabad:
The Pakistan Supreme Court has ruled that the courts must exercise a judicial restriction and avoid undue interference by judging service issues.
“The courts must exercise a judicial restriction and avoid undue interference with the executive discretion. Although the judicial review is necessary to avoid the abuse of power, the courts must respect the autonomy of the executive branch in the management of their employees,” says a seven -page written trial written by Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.
“Judicial intervention should be limited to cases that involve a clear illegality, arbitrariness or intention of poor trust. The courts must balance individual rights with the broader public interest. While it is imperative to protect employees from unfair treatment, judicial decisions should not undermine the broad emphasis emphasis of a civil and efficient service. Administrative supervision,” establishes the trial.
The sentence came in a case of Muhammad Nasir Ismail, a former employee of the Intermediate and Secondary Education Board, Rawalpindi. Ismail received the highest mandatory retirement fine by the competent authority for the absence of monitoring of duty for 48 days.
He presented an appeal before the Appeal Authority, which was dismissed. Subsequently, the petitioner assaulted the contested order invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the Superior Court of Lahore, Lahore, through a written request, which was also dismissed.
The Court indicates that sanctions under service laws have multiple purposes to ensure that public officials adhere to ethical and professional standards. One of its main functions is to maintain discipline and responsibility. Public officials occupy public confidence positions, and disciplinary measures dissuade misconduct while reinforcing the importance of ethical behavior. Without responsibility, the credibility and efficiency of civil service could be severely compromised. Another key objective of enforcing sanctions is to avoid abuse of power. In the absence of strict disciplinary mechanisms, bureaucrats can misuse their authority, leading to corruption, inefficiency and injustice. Such misconduct not only erodes public trust in institutions, but also interrupts the administration and provision of services.
The judgment establishes that applying the principle of proportionality to the present case, we notice that the petitioner remained absent from duty for a total of 48 days. The imposition of a great mandatory retirement sanction, in our opinion considered, does not meet the proportionality test, since it does not establish a rational link between the misconduct and the severity of the penalty or considers less restrictive alternatives.
The court has set aside the sentence at the point of the fine imposed. However, the restoration of the petitioner will be subject to a new determination by the competent authority. “Therefore, we direct the competent authority, that is, President Bise, Rawalpindi, to visit the petitioner’s case in the light of the principles described above and impose a fine consistent with the severity of the misconduct. To facilitate the expeditious elimination of this matter, let the petitioner appear before the competent authority in 11am on the 19.03,2025, after the subject. order to speak within a period of 07 days.
