1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
AGNATIUS PAUL Versus MEMBER, POWER, WAPDA, WAPDA HOUSE LAHORE and another
| Citation | 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Ilyas Lodhi, Muhammad Ismail and Noor Muhammad Magsi, Members |
| Parties | AGNATIUS PAUL Versus MEMBER, POWER, WAPDA, WAPDA HOUSE LAHORE and another |
| Primary Law | Civil services |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil services as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Muhammad Ilyas Lodhi, Muhammad Ismail and Noor Muhammad Magsi, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (AGNATIUS PAUL Versus MEMBER, POWER, WAPDA, WAPDA HOUSE LAHORE and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shah Abdur Rashid for Appellant.
- Sardar M. Farooq Abbasi for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 8th December, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Penalty‑‑‑Reduction to lower post‑‑‑Civil servant initially was appointed in BS‑7 as Accounts Clerk, but when few posts of Accounts Assistant fell vacant against direct quota, civil servant applied for the same and was duly selected and appointed in B‑11‑‑‑Civil servant was subsequently promoted to Selection Grade B‑15‑‑‑Civil servant was found guilty of misappropriation of amount and on basis of such offence which civil servant had himself confessed major penalty of reduction to a lower post from Accounts Assistant B‑15 to initial post of Accounts Clerk in B‑7 was imposed on him for three years‑‑‑Civil servant who initially was appointed in B‑7, had applied direct for post of Accounts Assistant in B‑11 and accordingly was selected in that grade‑‑ Authorities could not produce any document showing that civil servant was promoted to B‑11 from B‑7, civil servant's substantive post, therefore, would be B‑11 and not B‑7‑‑‑Nobody Could be reverted to a lower grade which he never occupied as reversions were always me from higher rank to substantive rank only‑‑‑Punishment of civil servant was varied to the effect that his reversion was converted to his substantive Grade B‑11 which he was enjoying before his promotion to B‑15‑‑‑Civil servant, in circumstances, would be deemed to have been reverted from B‑15 to B‑11 instead of B‑7. 1986 PLC (C.S.) 872 and 1985 PLC (C.S.) 548 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ILYAS LODHI (MEMBER).‑‑‑The appellant Agnatius Paul. Ex‑Divisional Accountant, WAPDA has come in appeal against the impugned order dated 29‑3‑1994 whereby a major penalty of reduction to all lower post i.e. from Divisional Accountant (E/C) to Accounts Clerk for three years without cumulative effect, was imposed upon him. He made a departmental appeal on 18‑5‑1994 to the Member (Power), WAPDA, WAPDA House, Lahore which was rejected on 28‑8‑1994 and communicated to the appellant on 3‑9‑1994. He then approached the Tribunal with the present appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 on 29‑9‑1994 with the prayer that "this T4on'bie Tribunal may graciously accept this appeal and set aside the penalty of reversion from B‑15 to B‑7"
2. Brief history of the case is that the appellant was initially appointed in B‑7 in WAPDA as Accounts Clerk. Thereafter, a few posts of Accounts Assistants/Divisional Accountants (B‑I1) fell vacant against direct quota. The appellant applied for the same and he was duly selected and appointed in B‑
11. Subsequently the appellant was promoted to the post of Accounts Assistant, Selection Grade (B‑15) by order dated 18‑4‑1990.
3. The appellant being Accounts Assistant/Divisional Accountant prepared Cheque No. 18034423 on 31‑3‑1992 for a sum of Rs.70,000 and signed it and also obtained the signature of the Executive Engineer. The cheque was in the name of Manager Finance Thermal, WAPDA, Lahore. The appellant got the cheque encashed from the Allied Bank and put the money in his own pocket as a result of which disciplinary action was taken against him. Accordingly a charge‑sheet and statement of allegations were served by the General Manager, Finance (Power), Lahore with a covering letter dated 22‑7‑1993. In the charge‑sheet and the statement of allegations, the appellant had confessed the drawl of the amount. An inquiry was also held into the matter. The Inquiry Officer in his report also held the appellant guilty on the basis of which the major penalty of reduction to a lower post i.e. from Divisional Accountant to Accounts Clerk for three years without cumulative effect was imposed on the appellant as stated earlier.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that since the appellant has admitted his guilt, therefore, he does not deserve any punishment. The learned counsel further submitted that at the most if he had to be reverted, he can be reverted from B‑15 to B‑11 and not to B‑7 because he was initially appointed in B‑7 as Accounts Clerk and subsequently appointed in B‑11 directly as Accounts Assistant /Divisional Accountant. Finally he prayed that the appeal may be accepted.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents resisted the appeal and contended that the department has already taken a lenient view and the appellant has been only reverted from B‑15 to B‑7 Rather the appellant should be dismissed from service keeping in view of his embezzlement of Rs.70,
000. Lastly he submitted that the punishment awarded to the appellant is proper and may not be set aside.
6. We have heard both the parties and also perused the record. The appellant was initially appointed in B‑7 as Accounts Clerk in WAPDA. and against a vacancy in B‑11 of Accounts Assistant, he applied direct for the post and was accordingly selected in that grade. Since the respondents could not produce any document showing that the appellant was promoted to B‑11, therefore, we take the appellant's substantive post B‑11 and not B‑7.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has cited two cases reported as 1986 PLC C.S. 872 and 1985 PLC (C.S.) 548 wherein it has been held that no body can be reverted to a lower grace which he never occupied as reversions are always made from higher rank to the substantive rank only when it is found that a civil servant was holding such grade initially.
8. In view of the above we are convinced that there can be no dispute with this settled position of law and thus we have no alternative but to vary the punishment of the appellant that his reversion may be‑converted to his substantive Grade‑11 which he was enjoying before his promotion to B‑
15. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order to the extent that the appellant shall be deemed to have been reverted from B‑15 to B‑11 from the date when the impugned order dated 29‑3‑1994 was passed and the period of three years will remain the same. No order is made for costs. Parties to be informed. H.B.T./1050/Sr.F Order accordingly.