English Shorthand Passage pdf | Legal Shorthand Passage pdf | Shorthand Passage Supreme Court Order pdf

English Shorthand Passage pdf | Legal Shorthand Passage pdf | Shorthand Passage Supreme Court Order pdf 

SUPREME COURT ORDER 26.11.2020 PART-I

Total Words: 350

 GULZAR AHMED, CJ.- We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case. 

2. This appeal is by leave of the Court. Necessary facts of the matter are that the respondent was employed as Officer Grade-II with the appellants-National Bank of Pakistan (the Bank) and was posted in the Satellite Town Branch, Quetta. He absented himself from duty from 31.10.2014 and was issued notice dated 08.07.2015, wherein he was asked to report for duty within three days of the said notice and to justify his absence. Again on 27.07.2015, absence notice was issued to the respondent and he was 



English Shorthand Passage pdf | Legal Shorthand Passage pdf | Shorthand Passage Supreme Court Order pdf

 again directed to report for duty within three days of the issuance of the notice. The respondent did not join duty, rather gave a reply dated 05.08.2015 in which he acknowledged the absence notice dated 27.07.2015 and stated that since November, 2014, he could not join the Branch due to threat to his life on account of tribal feud and that he has sent an application but has not received any response from the Branch. He has further stated in this very letter that it is extremely difficult for him to attend the office furthermore, due to life threat. In the letter, he has further stated that he may be allowed one more year’s leave without pay. He was again issued absence notice dated 06.08.2015 but he did not join duty. On 02.02.2016, he reported for duty for one day and on this very day he gave an application and thereafter, failed to report for duty.





Ultimately, through Memorandum dated 07.04.2016, the service of the respondent was terminated for remaining absent from 31.10.2014. 3. Mr. Kaleemullah Qureshi, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that where the very absence from duty was admitted, there was no need for conducting of disciplinary proceedings and that the High Court has wrongly assumed that order of termination from service was passed under the National Bank of Pakistan Rules, 1980.