Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 296 2021 SLD 296 2021 PLJ 24
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.A. No. 370 of 2020, decided on 1.7.2020, Dates of hearing: 1.7.2020. (Against the judgment Dated 3.3.2017, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore in Appeal No. 377 of 2014)
GULZAR AHMED, C.J. AND IJAZ UL AHSAN, JJ.
Ch. Faisal Fareed, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Mr. Babar Hayat Tarar, Senior Member Board of Revenue, Mr. Ishrat Ali, Commissioner, Faisalabad and Mr. Faizan Ahmad, A.C., Shorkot for Appellants. Mr. Shahid Azeem, Advocate Supreme Court and Mr. A

COMMISSIONER FAISALABAD DIVISION, FAISALABAD AND ANOTHER--APPELLANTS

VS

ALLAH BAKHSH---RESPONDENT

Law:

Section:

Service Tribunals Act, 1974-- ----S. 5--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 212(3)--Transfer of government land--Issuance of show-cause notice--Statement of allegations--Inquiry report--Requirements of natural justice-- Reducing of penalty--Admission of commission of offence--Powers of tribunal--Excess of jurisdiction--Self-contradictory order--Challenge to--Manner of dealing of appeal before tribunal is totally not in accordance with law--Where respondent himself has admitted commission of offence that he has transferred government land causing loss of millions of rupees to government exchequer, such conduct of respondent could not be considered as mere negligence, rather it constitutes misconduct and maximum penalty under law has to be imposed upon him--Respondent was proceeded against departmentally by issuing of a show cause notice and statement of allegations against him--An inquiry was conducted and requirements of natural justice were duly complied with of tribunal holding that respondent had been given harsh punishment and punishment was not commensurate with gravity of offence, is altogether misplaced--Powers of Tribunal under Section 5 of Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 to confirm, set aside, vary or modify orders appealed against are neither discretionary nor unbridled--Where powers are exercised under Section 5 detailed reasons must be recorded justifying such exercise which would withstand test of judicial scrutiny by Supreme Court--Tribunal has reduced penalty without much ado and no reasoning although respondent was found guilty of misconduct by all fora in all departmental proceedings--Order of Tribunal to be self-contradictory in excess of jurisdiction and devoid of any reasoning let alone cogent and legally acceptable--Appeal allowed. [Pp. 26, 27 28] A, B, C, D E Judgment Gulzar Ahmed, C.J.--The Senior Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab (SMBR) has appeared before the Court and filed a Report showing that as many as four persons were involved in making the present matter time-barred (at petition stage). Out of those four persons, one has expired and against remaining three, disciplinary proceedings have already been initiated. The matter is…
🔒
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