2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
EHSAN-UL-HAQ ADIL Versus PRESIDENT, HABIB BANK LIMITED, KARACHI and another
| Citation | 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Moazzam Hayat and Jehan Zaib Burki, Members |
| Parties | EHSAN-UL-HAQ ADIL Versus PRESIDENT, HABIB BANK LIMITED, KARACHI and another |
| Primary Law | Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Service Tribunal bench comprising: Moazzam Hayat and Jehan Zaib Burki, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (EHSAN-UL-HAQ ADIL Versus PRESIDENT, HABIB BANK LIMITED, KARACHI and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Ikram Zahid for Appellant.
- Muhammad Iqbal Khan for Respondents.
- Date of hearing; 11th December, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
R. 4(1)(b)(iv)
Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4
Dismissal from service on allegation of embezzlement
Appellant serving as cashier in respondent Bank, was dismissed from service on charge of embezzlement which charge was admitted by appellant and embezzled amount was returned by him
Appellant had prayed that penalty of dismissal from service imposed upon him being very harsh and severe, same be reduced
Appellant who was guilty of tarnishing image of a National Institution, did not deserve reinstatement into service
Appellant having frankly admitted his guilt, order of his dismissal from service, was converted into his removal from service to enable him to earn his livelihood.
Judgment & Decree
MOAZZAM HAYAT (MEMBER).
Appellant Ehsan-un-Haq Adil was a Cashier in the service of Habib Bank of Pakistan. He was dismissed from service vide order dated 21-9-2000 on the charge of embezzlement. His departmental appeal dated 14-10-2000 was rejected on 31-10-2000. It is prayed by him in his present appeal filed under Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 that the order of dismissal be set aside and he be reinstated into service.
2. The appeal is resisted by the respondents. It is stated that the appellant had admitted that he had embezzled an amount of Rs.6,000 therefore, he does not deserve any leniency.
3. The charge of embezzlement has been admitted by the appellant. The argument of his learned counsel is that penalty imposed upon him is very harsh and severe. According to the learned counsel the appellant had returned the embezzled amount within 13 days, therefore, he should have been shown compassion by the respondents. His prayer is that penalty imposed upon the appellant be reduced.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank has argued that the appellant had tarnished the image of Bank and had betrayed the confidence reposed in him, therefore, he does not deserve any lesser punishment.
5. Falling victim to the seductions of lucre has become a congenital weakness in our society. The appellant also became a victim of that disease. There are offences like pillaging, looting, marauding, murder and arson etc. but deadlier than all is making shambles of institutions. The appellant is guilty of tarnishing the image of a national financial institution. He, therefore, does not deserve reinstatement into service.
6. Since the appellant had frankly admitted his guilt before the Bank authorities, therefore, the order of dismissal from service passed against him is converted into his removal from service to enable him to earn his livelihood. With this modification in the impugned order the appeal is disposed of.
7. Parties be informed. H.B.T./9/FST?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.