Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1377 2021 SLD 1377 2021 SCMR 785
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 1474 of 2015, decided on 10th December, 2020, Date of hearing: 10th December, 2020, (Against the judgment Dated 16.12.2014 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Writ Petition No. 162 of 2014)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Abdul Rehman Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ghulam Shoaib Jally, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat H. Shah, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD NAEEM KHAN

VS

PRESIDENT, NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS

Law: National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Rules, 1973

Section: 3(d),38,39

(a) National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Services Rules, 1973--- ----Rr. 3(d), 38 39 Appendix-I, Sr. No. 12---Branch manager of a bank---Negligence and dereliction of duty --- Charge sheet, issuance of---Authorized officer---Perusal of the Appendix-I to the National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Services Rules, 1973 (Rules, 1973) revealed that delegation of powers in respect of issuance of show cause notices had been mentioned at Sr. No. I2. thereof---In terms of the said item, the power to issue show cause notice to all categories except (i)(a),(b) and (c) mentioned therein were delegated to Deputy Managing Director, Head of Administration Department, Head Office, Principal Offices and Senior Regional Managers---In the present case, the show cause notice was issued by Executive Vice President/Divisional Head, Head Office, therefore it would appear that the show cause notice to the appellant had prima facie been issued by a competent authority---Power conferred through Rules, 1973 was rightly exercised by the Executive Vice President and the objection of the appellant in such regard was misconceived---Appeal was dismissed. (b) Civil service--- ----Branch manager of (National) Bank---Negligence and dereliction of duty---Penalty of demotion to one lower grade for a period of three years being Branch Manager was responsible to keep an eye on the activities in his Branch relating to its business---In view of his senior and supervisory position, it was his responsibility and duty to supervise, exercise, control and keeping a vigilant eye on each and every aspect of business and services provided by different sections of the Branch; he was not only required to be vigilant but to have direct and first-hand knowledge and maintain supervision of all activities and the manner in which such activities were being conducted---Admittedly fraud was committed in the Branch and in the opinion of the inquiry officer, lack of vigilance for long periods of time and failure of the appellant to put systems in place and maintaining the relevant registers perpetrated and perpetuated continuous fraud for almost four years consciously and deliberately covered up the fraud and thereby…
🔒
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