2003 PLP 1092 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.

This petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been filed seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 3-11-1999 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal in service appeal preferred by the petitioner against his dismissal from service. The relevant facts in small compass are that the petitioner was employed as Administrator/District Sports Organizer (DSO) in the Education Department, Government of Punjab, Lahore and while discharging functions in the office of Director-General Sports at Lahore, was proceeded against under the Punjab Civil Servants (E&D) Rules of 1975 for committing the financial irregularities as summarized in the statement of allegations charge-sheet served upon him. The reply to the charge-sheet submitted by the petitioner having been found not satisfactory the competent authority i.e. the Secretary Education, Government of Punjab vide order dated 3-11-1992 directed for holding a regular enquiry into the allegations made by the Director-General Sports, Punjab, Lahore. The Enquiry Officer on conclusion of the enquiry having found the petitioner guilty of the charge submitted report accordingly and the Secretary Education, Punjab, being the competent authority of the petitioner, after providing personal hearing to him imposed upon him the major penalty of removal from service vide order dated 5-5-1993. On dismissal of representation and departmental appeal of the petitioner by the concerned authorities, he preferred an appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1974 before Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore. The appear of the petitioner was dismissed through the impugned judgment with the observation that the dismissal of the petitioner from service was unexceptional. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the judgment of the Tribunal regarding dismissal of the appeal of the petitioner was not a speaking judgment which was passed in slipshod manner without examination of the record and providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thus petitioner was condemned unheard. The petitioner who is present in person has stated that the charge of embezzlement/misappropriation of the Government funds leveled against him, was not supported on record as the amount in question was spent by him under the directions of Director General Sports, Punjab which fact was borne out from the record of the department, but the same being out of the reach of the petitioner, could not be produced by him before the Tribunal, and therefore, dismissal of appeal by the Tribunal without calling for the record was not legal. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard him as well as the petitioner at length. The findings of the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report under Charge No.8 in the charge-sheet are that an amount of Rs.9,675 was paid by the petitioner on 23-7-1992 to Abdul Hamid, Mechanic in connection with repair of tubewell without the approval of the competent authority. The petitioner has stated in his statement before the Enquiry Officer that 50% amount in question was paid to Abdul Hamid, Mechanic, on the oral directions of Director-General Sports without the approval in writing with the assurance given by the Director-General that procedural formalities would be completed subsequently. The petitioner, however, has frankly conceded that the making of payment to the mechanic without prior approval and sanction was not permissible. The report submitted by the Inquiry Officer reveals that the petitioner made certain purchases without the knowledge of Director-General Sports and approval of the Purchase Committee. The Inquiry Officer also noted that the commission of certain other irregularities by the petitioner. The perusal of the impugned judgment would apparently give an impression that it was passed in a slipshod manner, without application of mind and proper examination of record but in fact the Tribunal having gone through the record of enquiry, dismissed appeal of the petitioner with the observation that no exception can be taken to the order impugned in the appeal. We having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record with his assistance have not been able to find out any factual or legal defect either in the order of the competent authority or ins the judgment/order of Tribunal.--The petitioner has admitted making of payment to Abdul Hamid, Mechanic, without approval and sanction of A the concerned authorities which is not only an irregularity but would constitute misconduct under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. We are therefore, of the considered view that no exception can be taken to the order passed by the competent authority which was confirmed by the Tribunal in appeal therefore, this petition being without any substance, is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. M.H./Q-10/S Petition dismissed.