LHC explains how a govt servant absent from duty can be sacked
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has held that a government servant who remains absent from his duty for less than one year cannot be removed from service without cogent reasons.
The court said Section 4 of Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (PEEDA) manifests that where absence from duty is for more than one year and same is proved, the authority has no option but to impose penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service.
However, where absence from duty is less than one year, the authority under Section 4 of PEECA has discretion to impose penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service supported by cogent justification, in accordance with principles of proportionality, structured discretion and administrative fairness, the court added.
The court passed this order on a petition of a government employee, Abusar Ghaffary, who was working as computer operator with the Punjab Emergency Services Department.
The court allowed the petition and reinstating the petitioner into service and set aside impugned order and observed that no reasons are recorded to impose major penalty of removal from service against the petitioner. The court; however, held that the petitioner will not be entitled for back benefits as per the law.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that under Section 7 (f) (ii) of PEEDA, where charge of absence of duty is less than one year, major penalty including removal or dismissal from service cannot be imposed.
Admittedly, the regular inquiry against the petitioner was dispensed with under Section 5 (1) of the PEEDA and petitioner was removed from service under Section 4 (1) (b) (v) of PEEDA for being absent from duty for 63 days, the court observed. Where the regular inquiry is dispensed with, the procedure prescribed under section 7 of PEEDA is to be followed, the court added. The court also observed that the respondent keeping in view the principles of proportionality has not exercised discretion in structured manner.
No doubt, in the impugned order, the petitioner's previous service record and penalties have been referred to; however, the said record was neither confronted to the petitioner nor petitioner was charge sheeted in show-cause notice on account of poor previous service record, the court added.
The court said, when petitioner was already penalised previously, his current removal from service order on the basis of said previous penalties will amount to double jeopardy.
The court; however, observed that the petitioner's reinstatement shall be subject to a fresh determination by the competent authority regarding the imposing of penalty against the petitioner, which must commensurate with the gravity of misconduct and after giving cogent reasons.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
12 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Ex-senator secures bail in murder case
Additional District and Sessions Judge Rawalpindi, Majid Hussain Gadhi, Saturday approved the bail on medical grounds of Chaudhry Tanveer Khan, a former Senator from the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N). Tanveer was arrested in the murder case of Chaudhry Adnan, a former PTI MPA and ex-provincial parliamentary secretary. The court ordered his immediate release, subject to the submission of two surety bonds worth Rs1 million each, which were promptly furnished. Despite being under arrest, Tanveer was admitted to the Rawalpindi Institute of Cardiology (RIC) due to a serious heart condition, with a police guard stationed outside his hospital ward. Following the court's approval of bail, jail officials and police personnel were withdrawn per the instructions of the Superintendent of Adiala Jail, effectively restoring former legislator's status as a free citizen. Chaudhry Tanveer had voluntarily surrendered on June 17 before the Lahore High Court (LHC) Rawalpindi Bench by withdrawing his pre-arrest bail application. Police took him into custody from the courtroom and obtained a two-day physical remand, after which he was sent to judicial custody but admitted to the hospital due to his heart condition. He had been accused of conspiring and planning the targeted killing of Chaudhry Adnan, who was shot dead near the Police Lines gate in Rawalpindi. The FIR was registered on February 12, 2024, at Civil Lines Police Station, naming Chaudhry Tanveer, Osama Chaudhry, Daniyal Chaudhry, and Chaudhry Changez as suspects. During the bail hearing, the court observed that evidence regarding the conspiracy allegation was insufficient, leading to the approval of bail. The defence was led by advocate Malik Waheed Anjum, while co-counsel Chaudhry Yasir Advocate stated that the surrender was made voluntarily to ensure a fair and transparent investigation, and they would continue to pursue the case to prove their client's innocence. On the other hand, the complainant's lawyer, Shehzad Bhatti, announced that the bail decision would be challenged in the Lahore High Court (LHC).
Business Recorder
17 hours ago
- Business Recorder
LHC explains how a govt servant absent from duty can be sacked
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has held that a government servant who remains absent from his duty for less than one year cannot be removed from service without cogent reasons. The court said Section 4 of Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act (PEEDA) manifests that where absence from duty is for more than one year and same is proved, the authority has no option but to impose penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service. However, where absence from duty is less than one year, the authority under Section 4 of PEECA has discretion to impose penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service supported by cogent justification, in accordance with principles of proportionality, structured discretion and administrative fairness, the court added. The court passed this order on a petition of a government employee, Abusar Ghaffary, who was working as computer operator with the Punjab Emergency Services Department. The court allowed the petition and reinstating the petitioner into service and set aside impugned order and observed that no reasons are recorded to impose major penalty of removal from service against the petitioner. The court; however, held that the petitioner will not be entitled for back benefits as per the law. The petitioner's counsel submitted that under Section 7 (f) (ii) of PEEDA, where charge of absence of duty is less than one year, major penalty including removal or dismissal from service cannot be imposed. Admittedly, the regular inquiry against the petitioner was dispensed with under Section 5 (1) of the PEEDA and petitioner was removed from service under Section 4 (1) (b) (v) of PEEDA for being absent from duty for 63 days, the court observed. Where the regular inquiry is dispensed with, the procedure prescribed under section 7 of PEEDA is to be followed, the court added. The court also observed that the respondent keeping in view the principles of proportionality has not exercised discretion in structured manner. No doubt, in the impugned order, the petitioner's previous service record and penalties have been referred to; however, the said record was neither confronted to the petitioner nor petitioner was charge sheeted in show-cause notice on account of poor previous service record, the court added. The court said, when petitioner was already penalised previously, his current removal from service order on the basis of said previous penalties will amount to double jeopardy. The court; however, observed that the petitioner's reinstatement shall be subject to a fresh determination by the competent authority regarding the imposing of penalty against the petitioner, which must commensurate with the gravity of misconduct and after giving cogent reasons. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
17 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Business community leader expresses his views on budget
KARACHI: Convener of the FPCCI Central Standing Committee on Hardware Merchants, Nadeem Ahmed Kushtiwala, stated that peace in the region is vital for Pakistan to increase its share in global trade. He emphasized that the government should have incorporated suggestions from the business community in the federal budget to enhance exports, keep the wheels of industry running, and avoid entrusting local trade entirely to the grip of FBR officials. This, he said, would ensure business growth, higher tax revenues for the FBR, and enable the government to meet its revenue targets. He expressed these views while addressing the fourth meeting of the Central Standing Committee on Hardware Merchants held at the Federation House. The meeting was also attended by Deputy Convener Shaukat Ismail, Tariq Rasheed, Tariq Younus, Hamza Nisar, and Faizan Nasir. Kushtiwala pointed out that the budget lacks any notable tax incentives or facilitation plans for persons with disabilities, special individuals, and senior citizens. He further remarked that no projects or initiatives have been proposed for the development of key sectors such as agriculture, industry, manufacturing, and ports/shipping/logistics, the maritime economy, and exports. He criticized the absence of measures to address the ongoing brain drain, which is significantly harming the country, as nearly 90% of professionally educated individuals are migrating abroad. Kushtiwala also noted that the budget does not increase allocations for essential public services such as education, healthcare, and access to clean drinking water, which are crucial for improving the general quality of life. During the meeting, it was highlighted that no changes have been made to the Valuation Department's ruling system. The high valuation rulings on a wide range of HS Code items are driving up landed costs, severely affecting the export sector; particularly the textile and apparel industries in competing in the international market. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
