2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Zia Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioner. Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Addl. A.-G. The brief facts out of which the present writ petition arises are that the petitioner filed an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal which was accepted by the Punjab Service Tribunal vide judgment dated 15-8-1996. The respondents failed to implement the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal. Thereafter the petitioner filed an application for implementation of the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, before the Punjab Service Tribunal, which was disposed of by the Punjab Service Tribunal, vide order dated 9-10-1997. The respondents failed to implement the order of the Punjab Service Tribunal. Thereafter the petitioner also filed application before the Punjab Service Tribunal. which was also disposed by the Punjab Service Tribunal vide order dates 13-4-1999. The respondents failed to comply with the judgment and, orders of the Punjab Service Tribunal. The petitioner being aggrieved filed this writ petition.

2. The learned counsel of the petitioner submits that it is the duty and obligation of the respondents to implement the judgment and orders of the Punjab Service Tribunal. He further submits that it is the duty and obligation of the respondents to act in accordance with law but the respondents mala fide did not implement the judgment and orders of the Punjab Service Tribunal. He further urges that the respondents did not implement the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal to give benefit to his colleagues, who are favorites of the respondents. The learned Law Officer submits that judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal was not implemented by the respondents on account of the non-cooperation of the petitioner. He further submits that respondents have taken a definite stand qua the non-cooperation of the petitioner in para 4 of the report and parawise comments. He further submits that the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal was not implemented in view of the deficiency of the Annual Confidential Reports of the petitioner. He also placed on record note of the Department with regard to the missing A.C.Rs. of the petitioner consisting of period from 23-5-1974 to 31-12-2002.

4. The learned counsel of the petitioner in rebuttal, submits that respondents are not implementing the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal mala fide as the judgment was passed in favour of the petitioner by the Punjab Service Tribunal on 9-10-1997 but the respondents failed to place the case of the petitioner before the Departmental Promotion Committee.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of parties and perused the record.

6. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Section Officer E-II, who is directed to provide blank first paper of the A.C.R. to the petitioner within a week positively. The petitioner is directed to fill the same within a week after receiving the blank A.C.R. Form and shall submit the same to the Section Officer E-II, who is directed to send the same to the Reporting Officer of the period in-question or any other officer nominated for the said purpose by the competent authority. The A.C.Rs. of the period in-question shall be finalized positively within two months till 3-12-2003. After completing the said process, the case of the petitioner shall be placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee in terms of the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal. Respondents are directed to submit report to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court within the stipulated period. It is pertinent to mention here that petitioner is penalized by the inaction of the public functionaries or by non-cooperation by the petitioner with the department and the case was not finalized till date. In this view of the mater, both the parties are directed to cooperate with each other so that the matter may be finalized within the prescribed period. In case the petitioner fails to comply with the direction then respondents are directed to intimate the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court immediately, to avoid any complication of contempt proceedings against 'the respondents. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of this case, office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary, S&GAD Department, Finance Secretary, Government of the Punjab, and Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Communication and Works Department, Lahore, who are directed to look into the matter personally and see what is happening in their departments that either employees of their departments are taking benefits of their own misdeeds by non-cooperating with the competent authorities or the competent authorities are not acting in accordance with law, which is the command of the Constitution in view of Article 5(2) as the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Ch. Zahoor Elahi's case (PLD 1975 SC 383). The Legislature in its wisdom has added section 24-A in the General Clauses Act, which envisages that public functionaries must decide the controversy within reasonable time with reasons as the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court, while interpreting section 24-A in the General Clauses Act in Messers. Airport Support Service v. The Airport Manager, Karachi, Airport (1998 SCMR 2268). It is also settled principle of law that no body should be penalized by the inactions of the public functionaries as the law laid down by this Court in Ahmad Lateef Qureshi v. Controller of Examinations (PLD 1994 Lahore 3). They are further directed to give directions to their subordinates to act in accordance with law in view of Article 4 of the Constitution which is the paramount duty of the public functionaries as the public functionaries are receiving salaries from the public Exchequer to discharge their duties in accordance with law. They are further directed to submit their report to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court and issue necessary instructions to their subordinates in view of the aforesaid direction within prescribed period/time. The learned counsel of the petitioner is directed to hand over a copy of this writ petition alongwith all the annexures to Mr. Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Addl. Advocate-General, who is directed to send the same to the Section Officer, E-II, Lahore, for necessary action and compliance. Office is directed to hand over a copy of this order to the learned Law Officer, who is directed to send the same to the aforesaid authorities for necessary action and compliance. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. H.B.T./M-2245-L Order accordingly.