1989 SCMR 1476 (PLP)
MAQBOOL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER, MULTAN DIVISION and another Respondents
| Citation | 1989 SCMR 1476 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MAQBOOL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER, MULTAN DIVISION and another Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil service‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 SCMR 1476 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 SCMR 1476 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 SCMR 1476 (PLP) (MAQBOOL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER, MULTAN DIVISION and another Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. M. Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th July, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 2‑11‑1980 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Lahore, in Service Appeal No.179 of 1980). ‑‑‑ Dismissal‑‑Dismissal of civil servant after as regular departmental inquiry on the allegations of defalcation and gross irregularities‑‑Departmental appeal of civil servant was partly accepted inasmuch as the penalty of dismissal from service was reduced to removal from service‑‑Service Tribunal dismissed appeal against order of departmental Appellate Authority holding that Civil servant acted without authority and if there was. any extenuating circumstance its benefit had already been accorded to him in the form of modification of the punishment from dismissal to removal from service‑‑Supreme Court declined interference with order of Service Tribunal.
Judgment & Decree
SAAIJ SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑The petitioner was serving as sub‑accountant in the Tehsil office at Okara. After a regular departmental inquiry on the allegations of defalcation and gross irregularities, he was dismissed from service by the Commissioner, Multan Division. He preferred a departmental appeal which was partly accepted by the Secretary in the Finance Department inasmuch as the penalty of dismissal from service was reduced to removal from service. He then filed an appeal before the Provincial Service Tribunal but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court. In support of this petition it is urged that there was no evidence of defalcation against the petitioner and as such the penalty imposed on him was entirely uncalled for. It is to be noticed that the learned Tribunal examined the entire record and found: We feel that the appellant's admission that he deposited the money in the wrong head of account and that he made the payments to Shamshad and Abdul Qayyum, is sufficient to warrant the disciplinary action taken against him. Moreover, the fact that the powers of attorney were not to be found and that there was no mention about their existence in the relevant record, lends credence to the allegation that the appellants's actions were not above board. That he acted without authority is established beyond doubt. If there was any extenuating circumstance its benefit has already accrued to him in the form of modification of the punishment from dismissal to removal from service by respondent No.2" In view of the above findings of the learned Tribunal, no case for interference by this Court has been made out. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed. M.B.A./M‑857/S