1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

M. SALEEM CHADUHRY (CHAIRMAN).‑‑ In this case the appellant, Muhammad Awais, who was serving as Gatekeeper in the Nuclear Rese arch Laboratory of the Government College, Lahore, was reduced in the time scale by three steps and appeals against the concerned order dated 17th November, 1979 made by the respondent whereby for the period intervening between the appellant's suspension on 18th June, 1979 and. his re‑instatement on 7th November, 1979 he was considered to be on extra ordinary leave without pay. It is stated that some parts of the college bus which was stationed in the compound of the Laboratory were pilfered. An enquiry committee found the driver and two gatekeepers, the appellant and Muhammad Rashid, responsible and guilty of negligence. The driver was censured while the two gatekeepers were compulsorily retired from service by the principle of the College who was the competent authority. On appeal, the respondent reduced the punishment to reduction of pay by three stages in the time scale and converted the period between suspension and reinstatement to extraordinary leave without pay. The parties were heard. The record of the case was also examined. We are convinced that the enquiry was properly held and that the appellant cannot escape the verdict of negligence since he was one of the gatekeepers. Nor can we accept the plea that at the time of the theft the appellant was not on duty, because it is not easy to establish the exact time when the pilferage took place. However, we notice that the driver who was considered equally culpable with the two gatekeepers has been let off with minor punishment of censure although he even refused to appear before the enquiry committee. We think the punishment of reduction in the time scale by three steps is not unjust under circumstances and we uphold it. But in view of the treatment meted out to the Driver, and the fact that it is difficult to pin‑point the exact time of the theft which becomes a sort of extenuating circumstance, and considering the adequacy of the punishment inflicted on the appellant, we direct that the intervening period from 18th June, 1979 to 17th November, 1979 shall be treated as leave with pay instead of leave without pay. However, we find no ground to issue any direction about the appellant being a gatekeeper and not a Chowkidar, as the two terms appear to be synonymous. Similarly, we cannot interfere in the matter of residential accommodation for the appellant which is not part of a civil servant's terms and conditions of service. The appeal is, therefore, accepted to the above extent only. Appeal accepted.