| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 377 2018 SLD 377 2018 PLJ 103 |
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 4301 of 2014, decision & hearing Date : 14.4.2017.
JUSTICE (R) SHOAIB SAEED, CHAIRMAN
Mr. Masud Ahmad Riaz, Advocate Counsel for Appellant. Mr. Muhammad Sarfraz Malik, D.A. and Mr. Muhammad Adnan Khan, Senior Law Officer, Board of Revenue, DR for
Respondents.
Appeal No. 4301 of 2014, decision & hearing Date : 14.4.2017.
JUSTICE (R) SHOAIB SAEED, CHAIRMAN
Mr. Masud Ahmad Riaz, Advocate Counsel for Appellant. Mr. Muhammad Sarfraz Malik, D.A. and Mr. Muhammad Adnan Khan, Senior Law Officer, Board of Revenue, DR for
Respondents.
MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN
VS
SENIOR MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE AND ANOTHER
Law: Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006
Section: 5,9
Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006 (XII of 2006)-- ----S. 5 & 9--Charge of fake mutation---Deprivation of inheritance--Unclaimed land--Imposition of major penalty--Appellant, Qanungo was imposed major penalty of removal from service by competent authority--Supervisory Role--Contention of appellant was that Inheritence mutation was recorded by patwari and sanctioned by revenue officer, as such, transaction was complete quiet earlier than appellant's taking over charge of post--Validity--Record reveals that land in dispute was entered in mutation in name of "B", which area was under consolidation--Name of "B" could not be entered in register Girdawar Kishtwari, because neither "B" nor nay of heirs ever turned up for its possession meaning thereby status of land was Lawaris--Patwari being fully aware in connivance with private persons by declaring "B" as deceased entered fake Inheritence by producing a bogus claim of Inheritence--It is pertinent that patwari's role was pivotal being a mastermind--Patwari with mala fide intention kept verification pending--Appellant verified mutations without thoroughly sifting/examining record which he was bound before its verification--It was his duty being in a supervisory capacity to perform his duty diligently--Inquiry officer in his report recommended imposition of major penalty, but perusal of inquiry report and its conclusion reveal that role of appellant was referred to being negligent and inefficient--Inquiry officer laid entire thrust of mischief on patwari, thus no connivance of appellant with private persons can be attributed--Prosecution witnesses too did not directly attribute incriminating statement against appellant nor is any material on record available connecting appellant with heinousness of charge--Punishment of removal awarded to appellant is too harsh and does not commensurate with gravity of charges levelled in light of inquiry report, statement of witnesses and role of patwari--Penalty Converted--Appeal partially allowed. JUDGMENT Briefly, facts of the case are that on receipt of reference from Collector (Consolidation) Muzaffargarh Bearing No. 1039/Collector (Cons.)…
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