Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia

Organisation 2 cases

About Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia

Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia appears as a party in 2 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning March 2025 to September 2025. Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia appeared as respondent in 2 cases. Cases span the High Court (2).

How many court cases involve Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia?

Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia appears in 2 published judgments from March 2025 to September 2025. Most commonly as respondent (2 cases).

Practice Areas

JR to challenge for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the First Respondent to dismiss the Applicant. Applicant pleaded guilty to possession of dangerous drugs and self administering dangerous drugs. He was bound over with a bond of good behaviour under section 173A Criminal Procedure Code. Applicant alleged he was denied a right to be heard and bad faith on the part of the Respondents. Also alleged that the Respondents took into account irrelevant considerations. Proviso in Article 132 removes right to be heard if there is a finding of guilt which there was in this case. No proof of bad faith. Averment in First Respondent's affidavit made reference to the Applicant trafficking drugs which was not the case. This is a irrelevant consideration. 1 1 The Applicant was employed by the Ministry of Health (MOH), Government of Malaysia as a Medical Officer from 01.08.1991 and contributed to the Employees Provident Fund (EPF). 1 2 Thereafter, the Applicant was offered the post of Associate Professor by Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and in accordance with Pekeliling Perkhidmatan No. 2/1980 (PP 2/1980) applied for pelepasan dengan izin from the Government of Malaysia. Upon obtaining the pelepasan dengan izin, the Applicant joined UPM from 07.06.2005 until his retirement on 03.04.2024. 1 3 This Court finds that the central issue is the number of years that the Applicant is entitled, under the pension scheme, of his service. 1 4 This Court also agreed with the contention of the Applicant that the letters dated 24.12.2010 and 09.07.2012 were written on behalf of the Director General of JPA and the Applicant has acted upon it. Therefore, these letters cannot now be disregarded or revoked by the Respondents. Based on the above deliberations, this Court allows the Applicant’s claim in prayers 1(a), 2, 3, 4, and 5. 1

Respondent (2)

ba-25-23-03-2024 MYHC

FIRUZ ALZARHARI BIN ABU BAKAR v 1. ) Pengerusi Lembaga Kumpulan Sokongan (No.1) Agensi Penguatkuasaan Maritim Malaysia 2. ) kementerian dalam negeri, malaysia 3. ) Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia 4. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

1 September 2025

wa-24ncvc-3051-08-2024 MYHC

PROFESSOR DR. MANOHAR A/L ARUMUGAM v Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia

20 March 2025