conduct (Public statutory Corporation) (scrutiny) Ordinance
Clause 2(a). An appropriate authority could lawfully pass an order of
suspension, etc. against a person for misconduct amongst other grounds un2(a)
of Ordinance XLI of 1959 by which will be disqualified.
It was contended that ‘misconduct’ as used in
the order of the Governor finds no mention in the categories of the grounds
enumerated in rule 2 of the Public Service (Scrutiny) Rules, 1959 under which
an employee of a statutory body could have been screened by the Governor and
therefore, it was contended, in so far as the order passed by the Governor of
the Slate Bank of Pakistan purporting to remove the petitioner on the ground of
misconduct, it was bad and ultra vires the powers of the Governor.
Held: The petitioner cannot now
impeach before the High Court as he could not have done before the
Commissioner, the respondent No. 1, the validity of the order passed by the
Governor of the State Bank.
Held further: The Public
Conduct (Public Statutory Corporation) (Screening) Ordinance, (XLI of 1959) was
in force when the order against the petitioner was passed by the Governor and
clause 2(a) of this Ordinance authorized the removal of a person, amongst other
ground, for ‘misconduct’ also.
‘Misconduct’ as a separate and distinct
ground for the action taken against the petitioner by the Governor of the State
Bank is a ground “other than that of inefficiency” within the meaning of clause
5(1)(a) of the Elective Bodies (Disqualification) Order, 1959.
Jamaluddin Ahmad vs. D.K. Power (1962) 14 DLR 430.