1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑Messrs Muhammad Rafiq and Muhammad Ashraf have filed these appeals under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which they have impleaded the Government of the Punjab through the Chief Secretary, Civil Secretariat, Lahore and the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, S vices, General Administra tion and Information Department, Lahore, as respondents. 2. By virtue of these appeals it has been prayed that the impugned orders dated 26th February, 1981 and 3ist December, 1981 be set aside and the costs of these appeals be allowed. 3. As both the appeals are out of the one and the same incident concerning Shamsher Ali Khan Sial, Appeal No. 369/1210 of 1981, so accepted by us vide our order, dated 13th March, 1982, therefore, we will decide these two appeals with this single judgment. 4. The appellant Muhammad Rafiq was working as Steno while Muhammad Ashraf was acting Reader of Shamsher Ali Khan Sial, M. I. C., Gujranwala, when the said Officer in his capacity as Officer Incharge of Cinemas, conducted a raid, on 18th November, 1979 on Zinco Palace Cinema and hauled up one Tufail Butt, Manager of the same for commission of certain irregularities in which Muhammad Azeem Booking Clerk, was an associated culprit. It so happened that when the said officer sitting in his Court room charge‑sheeted Muhammad Tufail for an offence under section 420 of the P. P. C. and imposed penalty of Rs. 3,000 as fine upon him, a raid was conducted by the Martial Law Authority. At that time Muhammad Rafiq appellant, was counting the money handed over by Muhammad Tufail to him in lieu of the fine and was also on the eve of returning Rs. 500 which he found excess of Rs. 3,000, that Capt. Bajwa of F. I. U. entered the Court room and snatched the amount of Rs. 3,000 from the appellant and placed it on the table with the allegation that the amount of Rs. 3,000 was passed on as a bribe money allegedly to Shamsher Ali Sial. Muhammad Ashraf acting Reader was also considered party and found that as he did not enter the amount of fine (as contended by Shamsher Ali Sial) in the official documents kept for this purpose and did not issue a receipt, therefore, he was also guilty. In this connection an enquiry was held against both the appellants as well as against Shamsher Ali Khan Sial by the Martial Law Team headed by Col. Gul Zaman with Mr. A. R. Sharif and Additional Deputy Commissioner (G) as an Associate Member. The result of the enquiry was adverse against the appellants as well as against Shamsher Ali Khan Sial but with a dissenting note from Mr. A. R. Sharif. When this matter came before D. M. L. A. he referred this issue to the Governor/M. L. A., Zone A, Punjab who ordered that regular enquiry should be held under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules against the appellants. Mr. Aslam Hayat Qureshi, ex‑Secretary Services, General Administration and Information Department, served a charge‑sheet upon the appellants and Enquiry Committee constituted by him to enquire into this affair. After the conduct of the said enquiry, in which a number of P. Ws. and D. Ws. were examined, the Enquiry Committee concluded that all the charges levelled against the appellants stood not proved. The said report was sent to the Secretary (Services) S & G. A. I. Department who was competent authority in the said case, for necessary action. The said Secretary vide his report, dated 15th November, 1980 accepted recommendation of the Enquiry Committee and forwarded a recommendatory note to the Chief Secretary that the appellants as well as Shamsher Ali Khan Sial the main accused in the said case, stood fully exonerated. The Chief Secretary Punjab, in his turn observed as under :‑ "I have examined the record of the enquiries. All the three officials are entitled to the benefit of doubt. Recommendation in para. 6 may be accepted." The report of the Chief Secretary was forwarded to the Governor/M. L. A. on 23rd December, 1980. The matter however did not reach the Governor and the case was returned at the intervention of the Col. M. L. who did not agree with the findings of C. S. and demanded proper departmental action against the appellant and his co‑accused. In this manner the Secretary (Services) S & G. A. I. Department, passed the impugned orders after giving personal hearing to the appellants. Their appeals before the Chief Secretary Punjab were also dismissed. 5. We have discussed the entire aspect of this case in our detailed judgment, dated 13th March, 1982 which has been accepted by the Govern ment, as no appeal was filed against the same before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. As this judgment attained finality, therefore, its contents and verdict would remain binding for all times to come upon the Government. The ratio decidendi of the said judgment, which the appellants have placed on the record of this case, is that once the Secretary (Services) S & G. A. I. Department, who was the competent authority in the case of Shamsher Ali Khan Sial and the two appellants, had accepted the report of the Enquiry Committee which had exonerated them and the Chief Secretary approved the same, there was no reason for these two officers to review their earlier orders, without taking recourse to a fresh enquiry on the subject. 6. In view of our decision in Shamsher Ali Khan Sial's case as mentioned in the earlier part of our judgment, we do find a lot of force to the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, that once it has been held in Shamsher Ali Khan Sial's case by this Tribunal that the competent authority Secretary (Services) S & G. A. I. Department and the Appellate Authority, Chief Secretary had taken a decision in favour of the appellants, the same cannot be reviewed by them, without taking recourse to a fresh enquiry. 7. In view of the above, as the case of the appellants cannot in any manner, be distinguished from the case of Shamsher Ali Khan Sial's case, we, therefore, following our earlier judgment in his case, therefore accept both these appeals and set aside the impugned orders. There will be no order as to costs. A. E. Appeals accepted.