Public Servant

Every officer remunerated by the fees or commission for the performance of any public duty is a public servant under Section 21, P.P.C., irrespective of the fact whether the fee is paid by the Government or by any other public body or by an Act of Parliament under the Constitution.

To fall within the scope of the definition of "public servant" a person should be an officer; he should perform any public duty; and he should be remunerated by fees or commission for the performance of that public duty

Member of Parliament is "holder of an office" and is thus an "officer" within the meaning and scope of this term used in clause ninth of Section 21, P.P.C.

Person in his position as a member of Parliament does perform a "public duty"

Furthermore a member of Parliament is, remunerated by fees (salary and allowances) for the performance of public duties

Member of Parliament, thus, fulfills all the three conditions to fall within the scope of the definition of "public servant" provided in the second limb of the latter part of clause ninth of Section 21, P.P.C., and is, therefore, triable as a "public servant" for the alleged commission of an offence of corruption and corrupt practices (criminal misconduct) under the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

Contention of the petitioner (retired Accounts Officer) was that his pension had illegally been withheld by the (Balochistan Coastal Development Authority)

Held, that the officers and the officials of the Balochistan Coastal Development Authority were deemed to be "public servants" under the Balochistan Coastal Development Authority Act, 1998

Word 'public servant' was defined under S.21 of the Balochistan Coastal Development Authority Act, 1998, which meant a person holding any office which empowered him to do an act for the benefit of the government or local agency

Employees of the Balochistan Coastal Development Authority were civil servant and the pension was not bounty on the part of the government

Admittedly, petitioner retired as an Accounts Officer (BPS-18) on attaining age of superannuation (i.e. 60 years) and had been drawing pension for the last seven years and thereafter his pension was stopped

Balochistan Coastal Development Authority had no right to withhold the pension of the petitioner

Pension was right of a civil servant, which could not be withheld without cogent reason

High Court held that withholding of petitioner' pension was illegal and directed the Balochistan Coastal Development Authority to pay the pension to the petitioner

Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Such person was a public servant.

Criminal breach of trust by public servant, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery of valuable security to make or transfer any valuable security or to receive any money, forgery for purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document, public servant committed or attempt to commit criminal misconduct

Public servant

Jurisdiction of special court

Accused were alleged for misappropriating public money to the tune of Rs. 48,72,685/- from 74 accounts and shortage of Rs. 16,37,544/- in the cash-in-hand

Accused-respondents raised objections about the jurisdiction of the special court

Scope

Every officer of a society, including a co-operative bank, would be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of S. 21, P.P.C.

Present matter was exclusively triable by the Special Court, Anti-Corruption

Objections raised by the accused regarding jurisdiction of the court were repelled.

Statutory history of laws, rules and regulations in Australia that prohibit public servants from making comments on political matters provided.

In a system of modern representative government it was fundamentally important, and indeed essential, that a Parliament had the freedom to make laws that implemented the policy decisions it made for the welfare of the governed

Where a law impaired freedom of political communication in a reasonably necessary manner in pursuit of another legitimate object, the law should only be held to be unconstitutional if there was such a gross imbalance between, on the one hand, the importance of that legitimate object to the Parliament, and, on the other hand, the magnitude of the burden that the law placed on the implied freedom of political communication, so as to pose a threat to the integrity of the constitutionally prescribed system of representative and responsible government (in the Constitution of Australia).

Said freedom was not an individual freedom; it was an implied constraint that operated directly upon legislative power by restricting that power only so far as necessary for the effective functioning of the system of representative and responsible government manifested in the structure and text of the Constitution (of Australia)

Said requirement of necessity that constrained the implied freedom of political communication meant that freedom of political communication was not a trump over other values that were sought to be implemented in legislation that gave effect to government policy

For the effective functioning of representative and responsible government it was necessary for parliament to make, and the executive to implement, policy decisions that promoted other values

Need to respect parliamentary policy was reflected in the proper application of the adequacy in the balance stage of structured proportionality testing, which required great latitude in the assessment of whether the implied freedom had been contravened by laws that implemented important parliamentary policy

Structured proportionality testing promoted transparent reasoning in the application of an abstract constitutional implication; it requires the court to confront directly the suitability, reasonable necessity, and adequacy in the balance of laws that imposed a burden upon political communication.

Candidate being member of District Zakat and Ushr Committee submitted his nomination papers for contesting local government elections against which objections were filed which were declined by the Returning Officer but same were accepted by the Appellate Authority

Validity

Zakat and Ushr Committee was supervised and controlled by the Government

Candidate being member of the Local Zakat and Ushr Committee would be deemed to be a "public servant" in the service of statutory body controlled by the Provincial Government

Member of Zakat and Ushr Committee should remain aloof from the political activity

Chairman and member of Zakat and Ushr Committee would continue to hold office until his resignation was accepted by the District Committee

Candidate, in the present case, tendered his resignation to contest elections of local government but same had not been accepted

Candidate was in the service of Zakat and Ushr Committee being its member and his candidature was hit by S. 27(2)(e) of Punjab Local Government Act, 2013

Such candidate could only qualify to contest the local government elections if he resigned from being member of Zakat and Ushr Committee and a period of not less than two years had elapsed since his resignation

Candidate being member of Zakat and Ushr Committee was barred to contest the local government elections

Order passed by the Returning Officer was illegal and unlawful which was rightly set aside by the Appellate Authority

Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.

Petitioner was Chairman District Zakat and Ushr Committee, who resigned from the office few days before filing nomination papers for local bodies elections

Nomination papers were rejected by Appellate Authority on the ground that six months had not elapsed since his resignation from the office of Chairman District Zakat and Ushr Committee

Validity

Legislature in its wisdom had introduced a period of six months so that any influence Chairman District Zakat and Ushr Committee had, would not impact the result of elections

Any person engaged in administration of Zakat was also termed as "public servant" and all public servants were disqualified to be elected or to hold an elective office of local council unless a period of six months had elapsed, since his/her retirement or resignation from the office

Petitioner was conscious of the fact that being Chairman District Zakat and Ushr Committee he could not take part in political activity, therefore, he resigned from the office, otherwise there was no need for him to resign

Petitioner being public servant and engaged in administration of Zakat, incurred a disqualification for a period of six months in view of S.24(1)(f) of Balochistan Local Government Act, 2010

High Court declined to interfere in order passed by Appellate Authority, as the order was in accordance with law

Petition dismissed in circumstances.

Stamp vendor appointed by the District Collector who received the stamps from the government treasury for sale to the public and received commission out of the public revenue for performance of his work, was in the service of the government, entrusted with the performance of a public duty on behalf of the government and fell within the definition of 'public servant' in terms of S. 21, clause ninth of P.P.C. and S.2 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

Authority given to public servant was a sacred trust and public servant was required to perform his duties honestly and diligently

lf any wrong was being committed by subordinate, it was duty of public servant to ensure that not only the act of wrong was brought to an end, but also the delinquent officer to take to task in accordance with the rules and it was responsibility of public servant that none of his subordinates was being unfairly treated or denied any of his service rights and if it happened, it was his duty to raise hue and voice to high so that the grievance of his subordinates was redressed according to law

If the public servant would not act in accordance with said principles, either he was complicit or was merely negligent and he must be bur?cned with requisite consequences. WAPDA through Superintending Engineer and another v. Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No.VII and others 1998 PLC 180 rel.

S. 4-Public servant-General reputation of a public servant for corruption or living beyond means of income-Information relating to such matters, held, to be based on information received from various quarters and cannot in nature of things be based on such material as would be sufficient to prove conduct imputed to officer :in Court of law.

Held, a public servant. Clause (9) of section 21, P. P. C., it may be noticed, turns a person an officer by reference to his functions and duties. It is not the designation of a person that matters for the guiding factor is the duties to be performed. Unlike clause (1) of section 21 this clause is not limited to persons in the regular employment of the Government. Moreover, the appellant while acting as an auctioneer to the Government was in fact performing a delegated function of the Government. He was, therefore, an Officer of the Government entrusted with the duties contemplated by said clause (9).

S. 197-Public servant-Sanction to prosecute-Expression "any public servant who is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Central Government or of the Provincial Government"-Does not include public servants whom some lower authority has by law or rule been empowered to remove-Accused public servants removable without sanction of Central Government-Held, no sanction necessary for their prosecution-[Zaheer Ali v. The State P L D 1965 Kar. 180 ; H. A. M. Newbould v. Emperor A I R 1936 Lah. 781; In re : Abdul Khadir Saheb A I R 1917 Mad. 334 and Kyaw Htin v. Ah Yoo A I R 1934 Rang. 238 dissented from].

Public Servant Word "permanent", in certificate Interpretation and scope of. Where the word "permanent," in a certificate, which was issued to an Assistant-mistress temporarily appointed as Headmistress, was not entered in the same column where she was described as a Headmistress and it was contended by her that the word "permanent" referred to the post which she was holding and not to the permanent character of her service

Employed for fixed term in first instance, but later, accepting new terms of service, posted against a permanent vacancy-Public servant a permanent employee not entitled to be relieved in accordance with his original terms

Writ refused-Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 170.

Civil Services Rules, Rule 3’28, cl. (a).

Public Servant Suit for arrears of pay against Government-Whether maintainable.

Public Servant Holds office at pleasure of Head of State-Rules of Business (Azad Kashmir Government); Sched. 1, rule 2 (ii)-Provision for discharge of Public servant by "Council"-Whether guarantee of a constitutional nature-Breach, whether actionable-Azad Jammu & Kashmir Government Service Regulation, S. 30 Public Servants Enquiry Act, S. 24.

Public Servant Serving under Azad Kashmir Government-Does not hold office at pleasure of Government-Can be suspended or dismissed only for sufficient reasons.

Public Servant -Services liable to be terminated by one month's notice-No action taken after inquiry on charges but services terminated by one month's notice-Termination not necessarily mala fide.

Public Servant Public servant-Suit by, for arrear of salary does not lie against Crown in the absence of statutory provision or a contract.

Public Servant Public servant-May sue for arrear of Pay-But may not sue for declaration that he was in the selection grade during a certain period.

Public Servant Public Servant-Charge-sheet delivered against by Commissioner-Explanation tendered to Commissioner-Commissioner should not send down case to Deputy Commissioner to conduct departmental proceedings but should dispose it of on merits himself