1985 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHARY (MEMBER). ‑Mukhtar Ahmad, Ex‑Cons table has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974; wherein he has impleaded the Superintendent of Police, Headquarter, Lahore, the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Lahore Range, Lahore and the Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, Lahore as respondents.

2. By virtue of this appeal the appellant has prayed that the impugned orders dated 18th November, 1980 whereby the appellant was dis missed from service as well as the order dated 28th August, 1983, whereby the departmental appeal of the appellant was dismissed be set aside, having no legal consequence and the appellant be ordered to be reinstated with all back benefits.

3. Brief facts of the case are that in the year 1980, the appellant was served with a show‑cause notice dated 22nd October, 1980 as follows :‑ "On 6th September, 1980 Mr. Muhammad Rafique Butt, D. S. P. S. D. P. O.

11. Sadar Circle. Lahore on his way to P. S. Chung, caught constable Mukhtar Ahmad No. 1684 posted at Niaz Baig Kiosk receiving illegal grati8caton from one Muhammad Ishaq son of Muhammad Sharif Driver of Truck No. LEU/3222 in the presence of Sepoy Gulzar Khan No. 2446455, Sepoy Muhammad Ijaz No. 2528337 of 8 Baluch Regiment and Constable Muhammad Hanif No. 5763. The D. S. P. also recovered 2 of Rs. 5 from the pocket of accused Constable Ahmad, 1684. The appellant was placed under suspension w. e. f. 15th October, 1980. The appellant submitted a reply' to the show‑cause notice which was considered by the competent authority. He was heard in person and was found guilty of the corruption charge and was dismissed vide order dated 18th November, 1980 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Head quarters, Lahore. The appellant made an appeal to the Deputy Inspector. General of Police, Lahore Range, Lahore which was also rejected vide his Order No. 20707, dated 27th April, 1981. The appellant made a revision petition to the Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, Lahore which considered and filed vide order dated 28th August, !

983. Hence this appeal.

4. We have heard the parties. It has been submitted by the appellant who is present in person that he had been proceeded against on corruption charge but no regular enquiry was held and he was not afforded opportunities to defend himself. He has further submitted that in number of cases, already the Tribunal has held that an enquiry in a corruption case is must and the impugned orders in the absence of a regular enquiry cannot be sustained. He has, thus, argued that as no enquiry of any sort has been held in his case, was not afforded opportunities to defend himself, hence, the charge of corruption against the appellant is arbitrarily, false and without any facts. He has, thus prayed that the impugned orders being unlawful be set aside on these grounds.

5. On the other hand the learned District Attorney has relied on the parawise comments submitted by the respondents and has submitted that there is no truth in the above arguments of the appellant, as the appellant was caught red handed by the D. S. P. as well as he recovered two currency notes of Rs. 5 each from the pocket of the appellant, hence the charge of corruption/bribe against the appellant stood proved without any shadow of doubt. Thus, the appellant has been dismissed from service lawfully, correctly and no exception can be taken against the impugned orders.

6. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments of the parties and have consulted the record of this case carefully. We have already held in a number of cases relying upon the judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, reported as 1980 P L C (C. S.) 418, 1980 P L C (C. S.) 611, 1980 P L C (C. S.) 562 and P L D 1974 S C 393 ; that in cases involving charges of corruption, it is incumbent for the competent authority to hold a regular enquiry. Since the provision of the rules has not been complied with in this particular case by holding a regular enquiry, hence the impugned orders cannot be sustained.

7. The upshot of the above discussion of the case is that the appeal is accepted and the impugned orders are set aside. The case is remanded to the competent authority i e. Superintendent of Police, Headquarter, Lahore for proceeding in accordance with the law as indicated above. The appellant is directed to be reinstated in service to bestow upon him the status of a civil servant to enable the authority to proceed against him. The fate of the period for which the appellant remained out of service will also be decided by the competent authority after conducting the proceedings in accordance with the law as indicated above. There are no order as to costs. M.I. Appeal accepted case remanded.