Citation: 2025 SCMR 235
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench: Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Date of Decision: 24 September 2024
Case: Tassawar Hussain v. Regional Police Officer, Multan & another
Background
The petitioner, Tassawar Hussain, a police constable in Punjab Police, was dismissed from service in January 2011 on the allegation of absence from duty.
A show-cause notice dated 25.11.2010 and a dismissal order dated 11.01.2011 were passed ex-parte.
At that time, the petitioner was incarcerated in a murder case (FIR No. 434/2010, City Shujabad).
He remained in jail until 25.08.2015, when he was granted bail.
After release, he obtained a copy of the dismissal order on 01.09.2015 and filed a departmental appeal on 09.09.2015.
The departmental appeal was rejected as time-barred, and the Punjab Service Tribunal (PST) also dismissed his appeal on the same ground.
Arguments
Petitioner’s Counsel:
No notice or dismissal order was served upon him in jail.
He had no knowledge of the dismissal until after release.
He acted diligently by filing an appeal immediately after obtaining the dismissal order.
Respondents (Punjab Govt.):
The appeal could have been filed from jail through the Superintendent.
Tribunal correctly dismissed the appeal as time-barred.
Supreme Court’s Findings
No Service of Orders in Jail: The record did not show that either the show cause notice or dismissal order was ever served on the petitioner in jail.
Not Negligent, but a Victim of Circumstances: The Court held that the petitioner’s conduct was bona fide, and he was prevented by circumstances beyond his control.
Tribunal’s Error: The Punjab Service Tribunal failed to properly examine the timeline and facts before dismissing the appeal.
Mixed Question of Law & Fact: Limitation in such cases requires careful factual and legal analysis, not a mechanical rejection.
Leniency Principle: Courts often condone delay in appeals from prisoners, given their lack of resources and access to legal help.
Final Decision
👉 The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it.
The Tribunal’s judgment dated 15.02.2016 was set aside.
The matter was remanded to the Punjab Service Tribunal to decide the service appeal on merits after hearing both sides.
Implications
Limitation cannot override justice: Civil servants, especially those in custody, cannot be penalized for circumstances beyond their control.
Tribunals must carefully evaluate facts: A mechanical rejection on limitation is against principles of justice.
Favors broader access to remedies: The decision strengthens protections for employees in service law disputes, ensuring merits are considered first.
✍ Author’s Note:
This case reinforces that justice must not be sacrificed at the altar of technicalities like limitation, particularly when a government employee is prevented by unavoidable circumstances such as imprisonment.
