Dr. GHAFOOR HUSSAIN and another' vs PUNJAB PROVINCE and others
The Supreme Court of Pakistan heard petitions for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioners' appeals against their compulsory retirement from service. The petitioners, who were doctors, faced departmental proceedings for allegedly issuing a false medical certificate concerning the post-mortem of a deceased person who died in police custody. During the departmental inquiry, allegations of negligence were established against them. The petitioners contended that they had been acquitted in the related criminal case and that a Special Board's report negated the accusations. The Supreme Court observed that the Tribunal had thoroughly examined the material on record without omitting any relevant document produced by the petitioners. Holding that the Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction justly and properly based on the available record, the Court found no ground for interference and dismissed the petitions for leave to appeal.
- Does an acquittal in a criminal case automatically invalidate findings of negligence established in departmental proceedings?
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court interfere with a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal assessing departmental inquiry evidence?
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Listed petitions for leave to appeal have been filed against the judgment, dated 29-3-2001 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal.
2. Petitioners being the doctors were proceeded against departmentally for issuing false medical certificate regarding post- mortem of deceased Shakeel Amin who had died in police custody.
During the inquiry allegations of negligence were duly established, therefore, they were retired compulsorily from service appeals filed by them before the Punjab Service Tribunal failed as the same were dismissed vide impugned judgment, dated 29-3-2001.
3. Learned counsel stated that the allegations of criminal negligence are not proved because final report submitted by Special Board constituted for this purpose negated the accusation against them. The criminal case registered against them could also not be established as they were ultimately acquitted of the charge, therefore, the Tribunal may not have dismissed the appeals filed by them.
4. We have heard the learned counsel and have also gone through the impugned judgment as well as other material available on record. It may be noted that Tribunal has discussed the material available on record at length without omitting to take into consideration any document/ material so produced by the petitioners. Therefore, in such-like situation B when an order has been passed justly and properly in exercise of the jurisdiction conferred upon the Tribunal no interference is called for by this Court.
' Thus, for the foregoing reasons we see no substance in these petitions which are accordingly dismissed and leave refused.