2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN JAFFERY, J.

The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 30-4-2008, passed by learned Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby Service Appeal, filed by the respondent Sikandar Ali Khawaja, was partially accepted and he was reinstated into service from the date he was compulsorily retired to the extent that the penalty of compulsory retirement was converted into reduction of time scale by two steps for three years without cumulative effect.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on the face of documentary evidence, during preliminary inquiry, available on record respondent-Sikandar Ali Khawaja was found guilty; that the respondent failed to give plausible reply on the face of documentary evidence; that the respondent has taken an amount of Rs.45,000 illegal gratification from a private person which was duly proved; although the respondent was removed from service under Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, yet there was no need to hold regular inquiry, however, the respondent was duly heard by the inquiry office during the course of inquiry and that the learned Tribunal has not taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case in its true perspective. Therefore, leave to appeal may be allowed.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent, has opposed the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioners issued the show-cause notice against the respondent-Sikandar Ali Khawaja on the basis of fact finding inquiries and no regular inquiry was conducted in the matter; that the show-cause notice does not indicate as to why the regular inquiry was dispensed with and that the order of punishment against the respondent was issued by an incompetent authority i.e. Chief Engineer whereas in this case the competent authority was Managing Director/Member WAPDA.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and gone through the entire material available on record with their able assistance. Admittedly, neither any regular inquiry was held by the departmental authority nor the Chief Engineer was competent to issue show-cause notice. In fact, two senior officers held the fact finding inquires. The view expressed by the members of fact finding officers had pushed certain facts against the respondent not by initiating regular inquiry so as to prove the charge. However, the learned Tribunal restored him in service from the date he was compulsorily retired but awarded minor penalty of reduction in time scale by two steps for three years without cumulative effect. The said punishment was not challenged by the respondent which ex facie, reflects that he was involved in receiving the illegal gratification as disclosed in the allegations. The impugned judgment of learned Federal Service Tribunal is based on proper appreciation of material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to pin point any infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment justifying interference by this Court. No substantial question of law of public importance within the contemplation of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 is involved.

5. For the foregoing reasons, we see not merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal refused. S.A.K./C-2/SC Leave refused.