2017 PLC (C (PLP)

IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, J.

Both the instant petitions arise out of a consolidated judgment dated 20.02.2015 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore as common question of law of public importance is involved in these matters.

2. The precise facts are that joint disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the present petitioners along with some others under the PEEDA Act, 2006 on the following allegations (against the petitioners):- "Mr. Nazir Ahmad, Senior Scale Stenographer, School Education Department, Lahore. "He prepared bogus transfer orders of Muhammad Zahid Nazeer, PST, Mr. Muhammad Saleem, SESE, Mr. Khalid Aziz Butt, SESE and Mr. Iftikhar Akbar, PST in connivance with each other and with the help of Mr. Muhammad Afzal, L.A. in exchange of bribe. Mr. Khalid Aziz Butt, SESE, Govt. Model High School, District Vehari. "He got prepared his bogus transfer orders from Mr. Nazir Ahmad and Mr. Muhammad Afzal in connivance with each other in exchange of bribe." Thereafter they were charge sheeted with direction to submit their replies and simultaneously an inquiry officer was appointed who after proper inquiry, amongst others, recommended major penalty of removal from service for both the petitioners. Thereafter they were served with notice of show cause-cum-personal hearing under section 13/4 of the Act ibid and after affording the opportunity of personal hearing, the Competent Authority maintained the recommendations of the inquiry officer. The petitioners being aggrieved after exhausting their departmental remedy preferred appeals before the Tribunal which were dismissed through the impugned judgment, hence the issue is before us through the listed petitions.

3. Learned counsel representing Khalid Aziz contends that he has been exonerated of the criminal proceedings being conducted by the ACE authorities as such he stands vindicated therefore, the penalty of removal from service awarded on the basis of disciplinary proceedings cannot be maintained.

4. Learned counsel representing Nazeer Ahmad contends that he has been falsely implicated in the case and being a Stenographer no vital role can be attributed to him.

5. The learned Additional A.G. while supporting the impugned judgment seeks dismissal of the instant petitions.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned judgment as well as the material made available on the record. We have observed that proper disciplinary proceedings have been conducted and after fulfilling all the codal formalities the allegations against the petitioners have been fully proved. Further as per the statement recorded during the inquiry proceeding all the three teachers (co-accused) almost unanimously stated that they gave different amounts to Khalid Aziz petitioner who further delivered the said bribe money to Nazeer Ahmad petitioner and one Muhammad Afzal for issuing the transfer letters which were found to be bogus. In the presence of such substantial evidence against the petitioners we do not find any justification to interfere in the impugned judgment. Moreover, criminal proceedings on the part of ACE authorities as well as disciplinary proceedings can simultaneously proceed independently and the conclusion arrived at by the ACE authorities does not, in any way, override the disciplinary proceedings.

7. In light of the above, we do not find that any substantial question of law of public importance arise to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 212(3) of the Constitution. Resultantly, both these petitions are dismissed having no merits and leave to appeal is refused. MWA/K-7/SC Petition dismissed.