1983 PLP (C (PLC)

ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑Bilquis Nargis has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, against the order of suspension dated 22‑10‑1976, in which she has imp leaded the Secretary, Government of the Punjab, Education Department, Lahore, as a respondent.

2. By virtue of this appeal, it has been prayed that the impugned order of suspension dated 22‑10‑1976, be set aside and the appellant be re‑instated in service with all consequential benefits. This appeal was filed on 13‑6‑1982. The appellant has since retired after reaching the age of superannuation on 1‑11‑1982.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that according to the letter bearing No. SO (S) 12‑12182, dated September, 1982, issued by the Additional Secretary, Services, General Administration and Informa tion Department it has been settled that no enquiry against a civil servant can be finalised after his/her retirement, as he/she would no longer, be a civil servant and the disciplinary proceedings against them stand abated. According to learned counsel for the appellant, this letter has been issued on the basis of letter No. SRO‑1146 (1)/80, dated 20‑11‑1980, mentioned in P L D 1981 SC (?)214, in which the Central Government has taken a decision that once a Government Officer reaches the age of superannuation all the enquiries so pending against, would stand abated and such officer will retire with full pension benefits and the period of suspension would be treated as period spent on duty. It has been vehemently argued that the case of the appellant is fully covered by the Central Government decision as well as the letter issued by the Additional Secretary, Services‑General Administration and Information. Department, Lahore, and the appellant is now fully entitled to full retirement benefits and he; earlier prayer for quashment was only made because she was in service. Learned counsel has further made a grievance that a case like this, is a case of highhanded ness and a case of inefficiency on the part of the Department, where the pro ceedings have been allowed to continue for full seven years without any result. He has prayed that this matter may be brought to the notice of the Governor so that in future, such like lethargic attitude be avoided in the case of a civil servant.

5. On the other band learned District Attorney has submitted that he has no instructions as to where and what stage, these proceedings lingered on during six/seven years, therefore, he would not be able to make any com ment on this aspect of the case. However, he has conceded that the appellant has since retired but according to him, the proceedings still can take place against her during one year after her retirement as provided under the Pension Rules. He has submitted that he would take up this matter with the Department if he is so directed, to conclude the enquiry at an early date, so pending against the appellant. He has filed on record an order of the Governor of the Punjab by which her earlier suspension has been regularized up to 26‑11‑1982, till the date of her superannuation.

6. We have attended carefully to the arguments so advanced by the parties and have no hesitation to hold that according to the letter so refer red to above issued by the Additional Secretary, Services, General Admi nistration and Information Department and the Central Government decision so quoted above that the appellant stands retired with full pension benefits. With regard to the arguments of the learned District Attorney we do not feel impressed by the same as the Pension Rules so quoted by him are not applicable in this case as the same does not relate to the for feiture of pension and others, etc. The case of the appellant is crystal clear as she was ultimately acquitted by the Lahore High Court's decision which is placed on the record and proceedings against her, under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, remained pending for full seven years, without any result. Such state‑of‑affairs are highly detrimental to the interest of a civil servant and provides discontentment among them. A civil servant, if he is treated in such manner, he becomes fully frustrated and some time frustration leads to subversion. It would be in the interest of civil services as well as good name of the Government that justice should be done in the case of civil servants and they may not be left lingering on in the state of expectations for such a long years in service, without any result.

7. We, in view of the above discussions so made by us in the earlier part of our judgment, proceed to accept the appeal and direct that the appellant, who has since retired without being told the result of the enquiry so conducted against her for full 7 years, would be entitled to full pension benefits as settled down by the letter of the Additional Secretary, Services, General Administration and Information Department, Lahore as well as the decision of the Central Government, so quoted above in the earlier part of our judgment. The enquiry which is being conducted has abated. A copy of this judgment be forwarded to the Governor of the Punjab through the Chief Secretary to Government of the Punjab, for his kind perusal,' The period of suspension will be counted towards her services in the light of the decision of the Central Government. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal accepted.