Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 271 2017 SLD 271 2017 PLJ 25
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 204 of 2013, decided on 31.5.2016. heard on: 16.5.2016.
ASHTAR ABBAS, MEMBER-III
Ms. Rizwana Anjum Mufti, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Kewan Basit, D.A. and Ms. Sahar Chaudhary, Law Officer for
Respondents.

IFTIKHAR AHMAD BHUTTA, CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION (RTD.) MULTAN ZONE, ISLAMABAD

VS

CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, LAHORE AND Another

Law:

Section:

Punjab Civil Services Pension Rules, 1963---- --------R. 1.8(a)----Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006, Ss. 1(4)(iii), 4 & 21----Retired from service after attaining age of superannuation----Proceedings initiated against employees having retired or in service----Penalty of withholding of 50% of pension----In efficiency, misconduct and corruption as reflected in show-cause notice----Penalty of forfeiture of past service for period of two years----Competent authority failed to initiate legal action immediately----Validity----Department itself in responsible to bestow premium to civil servant and took action against civil servant under lousy advise, mechanism and marched on crummy path----It is well settled that when law provides some mechanism to do something, that thing must be done in that way, law permits and not otherwise----Rule 1.8(a) of Rules, 1963 would be applicable to those persons who have been convicted of serious crime or had been found guilty of grave misconduct either during or after completion of service----Before applying provisions of Rule 1.8(a), it was incumbent upon authority to have pointed out that pensioner has been convicted of serious crime or has been found guilty of grave misconduct during disciplinary proceedings carried out by competent authority but such exercise was not carried out while passing impugned order----Appeal was allowed. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ASHTAR ABBAS, MEMBER-III;---.--- Conspectus of the case as unfolded from the memorandum of service appeal are that vide order dated 18.02.2012 passed by Respondent No. 2 penalty of withholding of 50% of pension was imposed upon the present appellant by invoking Rule 1.8(a) of Punjab Civil Services Pension Rules, 1963 due to inefficiency, misconduct and corruption as reflected in show-cause notice dated 18.08.2010. Being aggrieved, the above said order was challenged by filing departmental representation before Respondent No. 1 (Chief Minister Punjab), which was rejected vide order dated 12.12.2012, hence this appeal. 2. Arguments heard. Record peruse. 3. Admittedly, the appellant being Chief Engineer Irrigation, retired from service on…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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