Law:

Section:

United Bank Limited (Staff) Service Rules, 1981--- ----R. 37---Dismissal from service---Allegation of misconduct involving misappropriation of funds by employee of the Bank---Service Tribunal reinstated the employee on appeal with all back-benefits ---Validity---Employee having refunded the amount at a very late stage had violated the Rules of the Bank, as such, keeping in view R.37, United Bank Limited (Staff) Service Rules, 1981 total exoneration of the employee from charge was uncalled for but dismissal from service was not warranted---Supreme Court, allowed the appeal of the employee partly and awarded penalty of postponement of promotion of the employee for a period of three years from the date of his reinstatement in service. WAPDA v. Abdul Waheed 2002 SCMR 753 distinguished. JUDGMENT SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--This appeal by leave of the court is directed against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 3-12-1998, passed in Appeal No.40(K) of 1998. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Iftikhar Hussain Khan, respondent No. 1 , who was Manager of a branch of the United Bank Limited, ,vas dismissed from service vide order dated 13-9-1997, on the allegation of misconduct involving misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs.9,06,648. respondent No. 1 preferred a departmental appeal, which was not disposed of till the filing of Service Appeal No.40 (K) of 1998, which came to be instituted on 8-1-1998. The Tribunal vide impugned judgment dated 3-12-1998, allowed the appeal, and reinstated the respondent into service. With all back benefits. Hence this appeal. 3. Mr. Ikram Ahmad.Ansari, learned counsel for the appellants, inter alia contended that the Tribunal has decided the appeal on surmises and Conjectures rather than on the evidence on record; that respondent No. l was custodian of the U.B.L. funds and he had no right or authority to misuse public money for personal benefit; and that he had not only failed to submit a reply to the charge-sheet duly served upon him but also intentionally avoided to face the inquiry proceedings against him. Learned counsel has relied on \VAPDA v.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492