Law:

Section:

Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973-------Ss.3, 4(1)(b)(ii), 5, 6 & 7---Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.4---Compulsory retirement-Appeal-Punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed upon appellant after issuing him show-cause notice and charge-sheeting him on allegation of theft, mis­appropriation/embezzlement etc., but without holding regular inquiry against him, without giving him' chance of cross-examination of witnesses against him and without furnishing him any opportunity to bring on record his defence---Validity---Preliminary inquiry, if any, could not be equated with regular inquiry---Since very serious allegations of fact have been levelled against appellant, a regular inquiry was mandatory and he should have been provided full opportunity to cross-examine witnesses produced against him and to put his defence---Order of compulsory retirement from service passed against appellant, was set aside and case was remanded to hold proper and regular inquiry against appellant within specified period in accordance with law providing him full opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and to lead his evidence. The Secretary, Government of the Punjab through Secretary Health Department, Lahore and others v. Riaz-ul-Haq 1997 SCMR 1552 ref. Sanaullah Noor Ghouri for Appellant. Niaz Ahmed Khan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 26th July, 2004. JUDGMENT QAZI MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI (MEMBER).---Vide order dated 13-6-2000, the Director Telegraphs, STR-I, Hyderabad (Authority) compulsorily retired the appellant under Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973. The Appellant preferred appeal against the said order, but his appeal was rejected by the Deputy General-Manager, PTCL, vide order dated 2-2-2001. Being aggrieved by these orders, the appellant preferred appeal under section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act of 1973 before this Tribunal on 2-3-2001, praying to set aside the impugned orders and to reinstate him in service w.e.f. 13-6-2000, with all back-benefits, treating the intervening period as on duty, and also declaring that the recovery of Rs.4,47,923 could not be effected from the pension of the appellant. 2.…

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