Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1251 1988 SLD 1251 1988 PLC 668
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Appeal No. 606/1055 of 1986, decided on 10th March, 1986.
IHSANUL HAQ CHAUDHRY, CHAIRMAN, KH. MUHAMMAD YUSUF AND CH. ABDU1 RASHID, MEMBERS

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUHAMMAD ZALMEER KHAN

VS

CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION, MULTAN and another

Law:

Section:

Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975-- ---Rr.4, 5 & 6--Penalty of recovery and withholding of increment-­Procedure prescribed by Efficiency and Discipline Rules not followed-­Order passed as a result thereof set aside--Government servant working as Sub-Engineer allegedly committed irregularities in payments made to contractor for earth work--Department instead of taking disciplinary proceedings against Government servant in accordance with law proceeded with matter in accordance with their whims and materially prejudiced his defence--Government servant was denied chance of hearing before Authorised Officer and same person acted as Authorised Officer and passed formal order as an Authority--Order awarding penalty set aside and case remanded to Department to initiate proceedings in accordance with law. Masud Ahmad Riaz for Appellant. Shafiq Gill, D. D. A. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 10th March, 1988. JUDGMENT IHSANUL HAQ CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).--The relevant facts for the decision of the present appeal are that the appellant was serving as Sub-Engineer in the office of Superintending Engineer, Muzaffargarh Canal Circle in the Irrigation Department in the year 1980. The authority noticed certain irregularities in payments made to the contractors for earth work. Therefore, it was decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the appellant and Malik Bashir Ahmad, officiating S.D.O. They were accordingly served with the charge-sheets together with the statement of allegations dated 27-8-1980 by the Superintending Engineer as Authorised Officer. Thereafter the Respondent NO-1 issued another charge-sheet together with the statement of allegations, recorded the statement of witness and ultimately imposed the penalty for the recovery of Rs.27,089.23 and also withheld one year increment. The order of the Respondent No.l is dated 23-12-1984. The appellant assailed the order through Departmental appeal before the Respondent No.2 but the same was dismissed. The decision was notified to the appellant through Memo. dated 29-1-1986. The appellant failing to have favourable decision at the Departmental level invoked the jurisdiction of this…
🔒
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