1996 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

NOOR MUHAMMAD MAGSI (MEMBER).‑‑‑Appellant, who was a L.D.C. in 502 Central Workshop, EME, Rawalpindi, quarrelled with his Head Clerk, Mr. Shah Zaman and physically assaulted and hit him on his face in the presence of other office staff. As a result of inquiry held against him, he was found guilty of ‑the charge levelled against him in the charge‑sheet dated 19‑12‑1993. Consequently he was. removed from service with effect from 7‑3‑1994.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length as well as the respondents. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant, could not satisfy us about the innocence of the appellant. The appellant hasp himself admitted in his reply to the charge‑sheet that he committed the offence in his protection/defence It is also mentioned in his reply dated 5‑3‑1994 to the show‑cause notice that he had done all these on account of loosing his temper and he repent on what had happened and wanted to be forgiven. He assured the Commandant that he will never repeat such a thing in future. He and his opponent Shah Zaman, UDC also gave a joint statement in writing to the Administrative Officer that a quarrel has taken place between them and both of them begged to be executed for the wrong done by them. Learned State Counsel also could not point out anything fatal to this collision

3. In view of the statements and admission of the appellant, the quarrel of the appellant stands duly proved. We, therefore, uphold the guilt of the appellant. But keeping in view the fact that the quarrel between the appellant and Head Clerk was a sudden affair and both of them subsequently compromised and gave in writing not to repeat such a thing in future, the penalty of removal from service appears to be somewhat harsh. The appellant has already put in 7 years' service in the Department. We, therefore,‑ feel that he should be given at least one chance to amend himself. While upholding the guilt of the appellant, we feel that some major penalty other than removal from service would amply meet the ends of justice in this case. We accordingly convert the penalty of removal into that of "reduction to three lower stages in his time scale for a period of three years with effect from 7‑3‑1994 without cumulative effect". The appeal is accepted to this extent only. No order for costs. H.B.T:/6/Sr. F Order accordingly