The failure to provide essential documents in disciplinary proceedings constitutes a breach of natural justice, rendering the dismissal of a public officer null and void.

[1] The Appellant, Mohamad Adri' Ammar Bin Mohamad, was a Lance Corporal with the Royal Malaysian Police from16 October 2008 until his dismissal from service on 23 October 2019. He filed a Judicial Review application at the High Court in Penang per Application for Judicial Review No PA-25-70-12/2019 for certiorari to quash the decision of Pengerusi Lembaga Tatatertib Polis Di Raja Malaysia dated 25 October 2019 dismissing him from service as well as for a declaration that his dismissal was unlawful and for the consequential remedy that he be reinstated to his previous position with all benefits.

[2] On 16 February 2022 the learned Judicial Commissioner of the High Court at Penang (as His Lordship then was) dismissed the Appellant's said Judicial Review application. The present appeal is directed at the High Court's said decision. The decision of the High Court is reported as Mohamad Adri' Ammar Mohamad v. Suruhanjaya Pasukan Polis & Anor [2022] MLRHU 298; [2022] AMEJ 0174 (HC).

Show-Cause Letter

[3] On 25 April 2019, the Appellant received a letter dated 26 March 2019 ("the show-cause letter"), from the Jabatan Integriti dan Pematuhan Standard of the Polis Diraja Malaysia ("PDRM") informing him that disciplinary action was being instituted against him pursuant to reg 37 of the Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1993 (P.U.(A) 395 of 1993) ("the 1993 Regulations") with the possibility of him being dismissed or downgraded under reg 38.

[4] Regulation 37 reads as follows:

37. Procedure in disciplinary cases with a view to dismissal or reduction in rank

(1) If it is determined under sub-regulation 35(2) that the disciplinary offence complained of against an officer is of a nature that warrants a punishment of dismissal or reduction in rank, the Chairman of the appropriate Disciplinary Authority to which the case is referred shall consider all the available information.

(2) If it appears to the Chairman of the appropriate Disciplinary Authority that there exists a prima facie case against the officer, the Chairman of the appropriate Disciplinary Authority shall-

(a) direct that a charge containing the facts of the disciplinary offence alleged to have been committed by the officer and the grounds on which it is proposed to dismiss the officer or reduce his rank be sent to the officer; and

(b) require the officer to make, within a period of twenty-one days from the date he is informed by notice in accordance with reg 52 of the charge, a written representation containing the grounds upon which he relies to exculpate himself.

(3) If, after considering the representation made pursuant to sub-regulation (1), the appropriate Disciplinary Authority is of the opinion that the disciplinary offence committed by the officer does not warrant a punishment of dismissal or reduction in rank, the appropriate Disciplinary Authority may impose upon the officer any of the lesser punishments specified in reg 38 as it deems appropriate.

(4) If the officer does not make any representation within the period specified in para (2)(b), or if the officer makes such a representation but the representation does not exculpate himself to the satisfaction of the appropriate Disciplinary Authority, the Disciplinary Authority shall