SULTAN HUSSAIN vs NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN and 2 others

' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.---This petition under Article 212 (3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 has been filed seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 17-11- 2001 passed by Federal Service Tribunal in a service appeal.

2. The petitioner was employed in the National Bank of Pakistan and while posted in Khawari Branch Mansehra, was given the show-cause notice proposing major penalty of dismissal from service for the allegation of financial irregularities and embezzlement contained in the charge- sheet served with the show-cause notice. The inquiry into the allegation was conducted under National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Service Rules. The Inquiry Officer having found the petitioner guilty of charges submitted report and the competent authority vide staff order dated 9-10-1999 dismissed the petitioner from service with immediate effect. The petitioner having availed the remedy of department appeal/representation, preferred an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal which was dismissed through the impugned judgment.

3. The main ground urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition is that the inquiry office did not provide him a fair opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and condemned him unheard. The major charge against the petitioner was that he fraudulently encashed a cheque amounting to Rs,7,50,000 from First Women Bank, Abbottabad, and on the report of Manager of the Bank case was registered against him at Police Station Cann. Abbotabad.

The learned counsel submitted that the return of the amount to the account holder allegedly drawn by the petitioner, was acknowledged by the Manager First Women Bank before the Court which granted bail to the petitioner and that since no loss was caused either to bank or the account holder, therefore, the allegation of embezzlement on the basis of which the petitioner was proceeded for the charge of misconduct, remained unproved. In the light of the conclusion of the inquiry office that petitioner committed fraud of Rs,7,50,000 at First Women Bank. Abbottabad, and also embezzled Rs,947 of utility bills the return of the amount in question to the account holder would be the direct evidence against the petitioner in proof of the charge. The mere fact that the amount allegedly drawn in a fraudulent manner, was returned and no loss was caused to the bank, would not remove the charge of misconduct against the petitioner who being custodian of public and private money was not supposed to act in breach of trust. The employees of financial institutions and banks are required to be extremely fair in the dealings and their conduct should be aboveboard so that people may not loose confidence in the financial institutions. The dishonest use of private property for personal gain even temporarily, without an intention to cause loss to a party or the bank, would not only be an act of misconduct but also constitutes a criminal offence.

4. For the foregoing reasons, we having found no substance in the matter, dismiss this petition.

Leave is refused.