Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1582 2020 SLD 1582 2020 SCMR 1708
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 4185, 4209 and 4504 of 2019, hearing & decision Dated: 20-07-2020 (Against the judgment Dated 28.10.2019 of the Punjab Service Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 2872/2014)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Abdul Rahim Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 4504/2019) Nemo for
Respondents.

DR. SOHAIL HASSAN KHAN AND OTHERS

VS

DIRECTOR GENERAL (RESEARCH), LIVESTOCK AND DAIRY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PUNJAB, LAHORE AND OTHERS

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13(a)

(a) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 13(a)---Civil service---Concurrent departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings---Acquittal in criminal proceedings---Double jeopardy, principle of---Application---Civil servant could not escape departmental proceedings or consequences thereof on account of his acquittal/exoneration on a criminal charge arising out of the same impugned transaction; these two were entirely different jurisdictions with different standards of proof as well as procedures---Criminal prosecution required strict proof through a narrowly jacketed procedure and, thus, State's failure on the criminal plane did not provide shield of double jeopardy to a delinquent officer. (b) Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (XII of 2006)--- ----S. 4---Officials of Poultry Research Institute ('the petitioners')---Procurement of birds through an aid package granted by foreign donor organization---Allegation of operating fake departmental accounts for fraudulent transactions; procuring goods of questionable quality to make illicit profit; and receiving commission in procurement who were officials of Poultry Research Institute were found guilty by the inquiry officer and awarded punishments including compulsory retirement and removal from service---Said penalties were maintained by the Service Tribunal---Held, that multiple transactions involving the grant package through privately held bank accounts inescapably established petitioners' culpability, as official channels were available in the form of departmental accounts to effect payments to the vendors---Similarly without approval or authority purchase from outlets through private arrangements could not be viewed as an innocent omission, that too, by officers with considerable standing/experience--- Petitioners' stress on the principle of proportionately in the award of punishment was entirely beside the mark---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was declined. (c) Civil service--- ----Public servant, duty of---Financial impropriety---Public trust, breach of---Consequences---Public authority was a most sacred trust and a very high onus was cast upon a State…
🔒
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