1995SCMR37 (PLP)

AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑‑This is an appeal with the leave of this Court against the judgment dated 15‑12‑1992 passed by the learned Federal Services Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, in Appeal No.44(K) of 1990 filed by the appellant against the order dated 24‑2‑1990, whereby the appellant was dismissed from service on the‑ground of misconduct for taking RS.300 as bribery from one M. Saleem, a labourer, for showing him credit balance of leave in his account, which actually was not due to him while working as Draughtsman in respondent No.2's establishment, dismissing the same.

2. Against the above judgment of the Tribunal the appellant filed a petition for leave to appeal, which was granted to consider the following question:‑‑ "We are, therefore, inclined to grant leave to consider, whether the official respondents were justified, in pressing into service Rule 5 of the above Rules by dispensing with regular enquiry after having decided to hold regular enquiry."

3. In support of the above appeal, Mr. Ali Amjad learned ASC appearing for the appellant, has vehemently contended that after having decided to hold a regular enquiry under Rule 5 of the Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, the respondent could not have adopted summary procedure.

4. On the other hand Mr. Ikram Ahmed Ansari, learned Deputy Attorney‑General; who has appeared for the respondents, has urged that a regular enquiry was in fact held and factually the appellant had admitted his guilt.

5. We have gone through the original record of the department and we find that factually the appellant in his statement dated 22‑11‑1989 had admitted the factum that he had received Rs.300 which he described as a gift and that even after the dismissal order dated 24‑2‑1990, the appellant addressed the following letter to the respondent on 10‑2‑1990:‑‑ "The Manager Personnel and Administration Department PN Dockyard, Karachi. Ref: Show‑Cause Notice MPD‑I(D)90642/1031 dt. 31‑1‑1990 Sir, Most humbly and submisively I beg to submit that I deeply regret for the happening for which your onerous and venerable honour is fervently requested to excuse me this time keeping in view my loyalty and adherence with the department so that my normal life may not be disturbed for which I shall pray for your longevity and prosperity. Thanking you, Yours obediently (Sd.) (Muhammad Inam) P.No.90642/D‑Man‑1 C/o AMPA D‑III P.N. Dockyar."

6. Besides the above document, we also find that the statements of the witnesses were recorded by the Enquiry Officer.

7. The above appeal has no merits. It is dismissed but there is no order as to costs. A.A./M‑2075/S ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.