CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and others vs MUHAMMAD ANIS BUTT and others
This matter involves petitions for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, which set aside disciplinary actions taken against several civil servants. The respondents, officials of the Communication and Works Department, were subjected to disciplinary proceedings for allegedly authorizing improper payments to a contractor for a hospital construction project, resulting in financial loss to the Government. The Departmental Authority had imposed major penalties, including reduction in rank and recovery of losses, following show-cause notices issued under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. The respondents challenged these penalties before the Service Tribunal, which allowed their appeals. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the Service Tribunal erred in interfering with the departmental proceedings. Specifically, the Court seeks to determine if the Tribunal correctly assessed the respondents' conduct regarding the unauthorized advancement of payments to the contractor, which appeared to violate specific departmental instructions prohibiting such advances under the Buildings and Roads Department Code, thereby constituting gross negligence and misconduct.
- Can a Service Tribunal interfere with departmental disciplinary proceedings where civil servants are found guilty of gross negligence?
- Does the unauthorized advancement of payments to a contractor, contrary to departmental codes, constitute misconduct under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975?
- Is the dispensation of a regular inquiry in favor of a show-cause notice procedure under Rule 6(3) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 legally permissible?
- Rule 6(3), Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975
- Rule 4(1)(b)(i), Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975
- Rule 4(1)(b)(i-A), Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975
- Item No. 2.98, Buildings and Roads Department Code
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---By means of instant order we intend to dispose of above listed petitions for leave to appeals as common judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore dated 15th August, 2002 has been assailed therein.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that Secretary Communication and Works Department, after obtaining the necessary permission from the Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab, initiated the disciplinary proceedings against the respondents and other officials, on the allegations that they malafidely allowed payment of various items in the execution of a scheme titled as "construction of 125 bedded District Headquarters Hospital, Jauharbad Group No.1". It was subsequently reported that the contractor had taken away those items for which payment had been made and abandoned the contract thus causing financial loss to the Government. Secretary C&W while acting as authorized officer,. Dispensed with the regular enquiry and opted for the issuance of show-cause notice under rule 6(3) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules') all the three respondents along with other officials were intimated through the show cause notices the items along with the amounts which they had recommended or sanctioned for payment of the Contractor, and after affording them opportunity of personal hearing, recommended the imposition of following penalties upon the respondents:--
(1) Mr. Muhammad Dilshad Disissal from service and Akhtar, .Formerly XEN recovery of loss aused.
Provincial Building Division, Jauharabad.
(2) Mr. Muhammad Anis Butt, formerly SDO Provincial Building Division, Jauharabad.
(3) Mr. Faqir Hussain, Sub-Engineer.
' Removal from service and recovery of loss caused.
3. Chief Secretary as Authority heard the respondents through a Hearing Officer and vide order dated 10th January, 1998 imposed upon the respondents following penalties:-- ( 1 ) Mr. Muhammad Akhtar formerly Provincial Building Jauharabad. Dilshad Major penalty of reduction XEN to a lower grade under rule Division, 4(1) (1/) (I) and recovery of loss caused to Government under rule 4(1)(b)(i-A) of the E&D Rules.
1975.
(2) Mr. Muhammad Anis Butt, Major penalty of reduction in formerly SDO Provincial a time-scale by two stages Building Division, Jauharabad. Under rule 4(1)(b)(i) and recovery of loss caused to Government under rule 4(1)(b)(i-A) of he E&D Rules, 1975.
(3) Mr. Faqir Hussain, Sub- Major penalty of reduction in Engineer a time-scale by two stages under rules 4(1)(b)(i) and recovery of loss caused to Government under rule 4(1)(b)(i-A) of the E&D Rules.
1975.
' The respondents preferred departmental representations, which were rejected vide letter dated 3rd September, 1998, issued to them separately. Feeling dissatisfied, they approached the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore by filing appeals, which have been allowed by means of impugned judgment. As such instant petitions for leave to appeal have been filed.
' After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and caveat in Civil Petition No.3775-L of 2002, and having gone through the impugned judgment carefully, we grant leave to appeal, inter alia, to examine as to whether Service Tribunal, interfered in the departmental proceedings, whereby respondents were found guilty for committing gross negligence and misconduct in advancing material to the contractor, contrary to instructions/rules of the Department, contained in item No.2.98 of the Buildings and Roads Department Code, according to which "advances to the contractor" are prohibited except in some cases i.e. The advances in respect of finished work and; the advance payment for the work actually executed, etc.