The Lahore High Court, Multan Bench Justice Muhammad Jehangir Arshad has sought a report from Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) Chairman and parawise comments, within four weeks, on a complaint of retaliatory and revengeful attitude of Multan Electric Power Company (Mepco) Chief Executive.
The Judge also ordered dispatching the copy of the petition to Wapda chairman. The LHC bench has sought this report following "continuous misconduct", by Mepco chief executive Agha Nazim Ali, and adopting "revengeful attitude" against the petitioner.
Earlier, petitioner Mepco deputy manager, regional complaint centre, Abdul Rahim Khan, had filed a writ petition through counsel Syed Irfan Haider Shamsi stating that Mepco chief executive had become retaliatory, amounting to misconduct, and revengeful in his personal capacity, instead of acting in his official status.
The petitioner requested for his safety from the injustice and victimisation being committed by Mepco chief executive Agha Nazim Ali, as he had transferred him (Abdul Rahim) from Bahawalpur to Multan "in violation of rules, curtailing his salary to less then 50 percent in retaliation".
He said that he was being victimised in reference of his statement submitted before LHC Bahawalpur bench when he was sent to the court for proceedings without any brief and he had told the court about his lack of knowledge of that case.
The LHC Bahawalpur Justice Khalid Alvi, on observing the submission, took very serious notice and summoned the Mepco chief executive Agha Nazim Ali in person for explanation before the court by September 20, 2006.
The court observed that Mepco chief executive should explain his position why officers who hade no knowledge about facts of the case had been sent for wasting public time. However, the Mepco chief executive did not bother about the court summons and did not appear and sent his Director, Legal.
Then the LHC Bahawalpur bench issued contempt notice to Mepco chief executive and directed court office to open a separate file to initiate contempt proceedings against the Mepco chief executive.
The court called upon him to show cause why he had failed to appear before the court in person despite there being a specific direction and had sent the Director, Legal to attend proceedings who was not at all required by the court. The case was adjourned for September 29, 2006.
Later, the petitioner (in Bahawalpur case) Humaira Naureen, who had filed petition against detection bill, had withdrawn the petition on the date of hearing on September 29, 2006.
The petitioner Abdul Rahim Khan stated that the Mepco chief executive Agha Nazim Ali had become revengeful following initiation of contempt case by the LHC Bahawalpur bench, and he served him show-cause notice. The Mepco chief executive summoned him in person for hearing on December 2, 2006 in connection with show-cause notice.
However, the petitioner was immediately transferred from Bahawalpur to Multan on the date of his personal hearing on December 2, 2006. The petitioner was posted as deputy manager regional complaint centre in Multan. The transfer was against the policy of Wapda chairman and the petitioner made a representation to Wapda chairman for cancellation of his transfer.
The Mepco chief executive also convicted (sic) the petitioner and imposed major penalty of 'Reduction in two stages below in time scale for a period of two years', without conducting prior detailed inquiry.
The Mepco chief executive, under his focused atrocities against the petitioner, cut his salary (to) less than 50 percent, and issued salary cheque worth Rs 12,896, instead (of) due payable Rs 29,543. The petitioner returned (back) the salary cheque in protest for the issuance of full month salary to him.
The petitioner prayed the LHC Multan bench to direct the Wapda chairman to hold thorough probe into the matter through some upright high-ranking officers so to find out the actual facts involved in his revengeful victimisation. He further prayed the court be declared show-cause notices served to him illegal, unlawful and quashed, and the Wapda chairman be directed to dispose of his appeal in accordance with law.
Comments
Comments are closed.