Penalty of dismissal from service can't be awarded sans probe: SC
It also said that in cases involving public funds extra caution and due care is required to be observed to prove the charge of embezzlement or misappropriation, whereas, proper inquiry needs to be conducted in a fair and transparent manner to ensure that the public funds, so misappropriated, could be retrieved and the civil servant involved in such offence, shall be punished accordingly.
A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Mussarat Hilali, observed that while hearing an appeal against the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore.
Brief facts of the case are that District Coordination Officer/ District Collector Mianwali proceeded against the petitioner (Malik Muhammad Ramzan) and awarded punishment of dismissal from service by invoking the provisions of PEEDA Act, 2006 on the charges of fraud and embezzlement of funds committed by the petitioner by increasing the amounts of cheques through forgery after getting them signed from the authorities.
The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order of dismissal, filed departmental appeal before departmental authorities, which was rejected on 11.11.2016. The petitioner then filed revision petition, which was also dismissed on 02.03.2018. He then filed an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore. However, such appeal was also dismissed on 24.01.2022. Thus, this petition was filed before the apex court.
The petitioner contended before the Supreme Court that he was not provided with an opportunity of being heard. 'I was never served with any show-cause notice nor any regular inquiry was conducted while imposing a major penalty of dismissal from service,' he asserted.
Conversely, the Additional Advocate General, Punjab, submitted that the petitioner was duly served with Show-Cause Notice(s) and was given an opportunity of being heard.
The court after perusal of facts and examination of record, found that respondents failed to place on record any material or evidence to show that petitioner was ever served with the Show-Cause Notice(s) or was associated by the IO for the purposes of conducting regular inquiry. It further noted that major penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed on the allegations of embezzlement/ misappropriation of funds; however, without confronting the petitioner with any material or evidence, which may support such allegations.
It set aside the Tribunal's verdict, and the respondents were directed to re-instate the petitioner into service. However, it remanded the matter to the departmental authority to conduct de novo inquiry into the allegations levelled against the petitioner while providing him sufficient opportunity of being heard in terms of Sections 9 and 10 of the Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006.
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
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
12 PTI protestersgranted bail by court
A local court on Tuesday granted bail to 12 workers of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) who were detained on charges of rioting, stone-pelting, and attacking police during a protest rally in the metropolis on August 5. The judicial magistrate for District East approved the bail pleas filed by defence lawyers and ordered the release of the accused against surety bonds of Rs5,000 each. Earlier, police had produced the accused before the court and sought their physical remand for further interrogation. According to the IO, the PTI workers had blocked the road during a rally led by senior party leaders, including Firdous Shamim Naqvi, Awab Alvi, and Raja Azhar, at Hassan Square. The IO claimed the protest turned violent when the accused pelted stones at law enforcers and attacked them with sticks, injuring a police officer identified as Aijaz. However, the court turned down police's request and granted bail to all 12 accused, who were identified as Nadir, Abdul Rafi, Sarfraz Jameel, Fida Rehman, Nabi Ahmad, Abdul Rashid, Muhammad Ibrahim, Younus Khan, Zar Wali, Muhammad Hanif, Sohail Ahmad Memon, and Adnan. Later, PTI Sindh President Haleem Adil visited the city court to meet the released workers.
Business Recorder
6 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Lula rejects ‘humiliation' of calling Trump over US-Brazil tariff
BRASILIA: As U.S. tariffs on Brazilian goods jumped to 50% on Wednesday, Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told Reuters in an interview that he saw no room for direct talks with U.S. President Donald Trump which he believes would turn into a 'humiliation' for him. Brazil is not about to announce reciprocal tariffs, he said. Nor will his government give up on cabinet-level talks. But Lula himself is in no rush to ring the White House. 'The day my intuition says Trump is ready to talk, I won't hesitate to call him,' Lula said in an interview from his presidential residence in Brasilia. 'But today my intuition says he doesn't want to talk. And I'm not going to humiliate myself.' Despite Brazil's exports facing one of the highest tariffs imposed by Trump, the new U.S. trade barriers look unlikely to derail Latin America's largest economy, giving Lula more room to stand his ground against Trump than most Western leaders. Lula described U.S.-Brazil relations at a 200-year nadir after Trump tied the new tariff to his demand for an end to the prosecution of right-wing former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is standing trial for plotting to overturn the 2022 election. Brazil's Lula says he won't take orders from 'gringo' Trump The president said Brazil's Supreme Court, which is hearing the case against Bolsonaro, 'does not care what Trump says and it should not,' adding that Bolsonaro should face another trial for provoking Trump's intervention, calling the right-wing former president a 'traitor to the homeland.' 'We had already pardoned the U.S. intervention in the 1964 coup,' said Lula, who got his political start as a union leader protesting against the military government that followed. 'But this now is not a small intervention. It's the president of the United States thinking he can dictate rules for a sovereign country like Brazil. It's unacceptable.' Lula said his ministers were struggling to open talks with U.S. peers, so his government was focused on domestic measures to cushion the economic blow of U.S. tariffs, while maintaining 'fiscal responsibility.' He also said he was planning to call leaders from the BRICS group of developing nations, starting with India and China, to discuss the possibility of a joint response to U.S. tariffs. Lula also described plans to create a new national policy for Brazil's strategic mineral resources, treating them as a matter of 'national sovereignty' to break with a history of mining exports that added little value in Brazil.
Express Tribune
9 hours ago
- Express Tribune
LHC rules delay in appeals not justified by filing in wrong forum
Listen to article The Lahore High Court (LHC) has ruled that delays in appeals against convictions can only be excused when a sufficient and reasonable cause is demonstrated. Relying on the incorrect forum does not meet the legal requirements for delay condonation. The ruling came during the hearing of a case where a convict had filed an appeal against his conviction in the district court, ignoring the requirement that such appeals, under the Punjab Food Authority Act, 2011 (amended in 2015), should be filed directly with the LHC. The key legal question before the court was whether the appellant's decision to file his appeal in the wrong forum, which led to its dismissal, could justify the filing of a fresh appeal at the LHC beyond the statutory limitation period. The convict, Zainul Abideen, was sentenced on May 15, 2017, by a magistrate in Lahore. However, instead of approaching the LHC, as mandated by Section 45-A of the Act of 2011, he filed an appeal in the Sessions Court on May 22, 2017. This forum lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal under the said Act. The appeal remained pending in the Sessions Court for around seven months and was ultimately dismissed on December 21, 2017, for lack of jurisdiction. The appellant then filed a fresh appeal at the LHC on January 19, 2018, along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1908, seeking to condone the delay in filing his appeal. Justice Abher Gul Khan, who was hearing the case, noted that the appellant had failed to challenge or seek to set aside the judgment passed by the additional sessions judge, which dismissed his earlier appeal. This lack of challenge left the earlier dismissal order intact, which could have implications for the present appeal's maintainability. The judge further observed that during the seven-month period when the appeal was pending in the sessions court, neither the appellant nor his legal counsel addressed the critical legal issue of the forum's lack of jurisdiction. Instead, they passively awaited a favourable outcome. It was only after the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction that they chose to file the current appeal before the LHC. Justice Khan emphasised that while the court often exercises discretion in condoning delays, it is not automatic. The court would not routinely condone delays unless the appellant could provide valid and convincing reasons. The judge highlighted that such condonation cannot be treated as a mechanical rule to apply in every case. The case stemmed from a complaint filed by the Punjab Food Authority, alleging offenses under Sections 22-A and 24-A of the Punjab Food Authority Act, 2011. The judicial magistrate took cognisance of the case and summoned the appellant. After trial, the magistrate found Zain guilty of an offence under Section 24-A of the Act, sentencing him to one month's imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs100,000. Since the sentence was less than one year, the magistrate exercised discretion under Section 382-A of the CrPC and postponed the execution of the sentence to allow the appellant the opportunity to file an appeal, contingent upon him furnishing bail bonds of Rs200,000.
