The Chief Secretary, Government Of Sindh, Karachi And Another vs Umar-
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, challenging a judgment of the Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi, which had set aside departmental orders passed against the respondent. The core legal question was whether departmental proceedings initiated against a retired government servant were legally maintainable when commenced beyond the statutory limitation period. The respondent, a former Additional Deputy Commissioner, was accused of embezzlement during his tenure, but the departmental proceedings were initiated after his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any irregularity or illegality in the Tribunal's judgment. The Court held that the case was governed by Rule 18 of the West Pakistan Civil Servants Rules, which mandates that departmental proceedings against government pensioners cannot be instituted more than one year after their retirement. Finding that the proceedings were initiated in violation of this mandatory time limit, the Court dismissed the petition and refused leave to appeal, affirming the principle that departmental disciplinary actions against retired civil servants are time-barred if not commenced within the prescribed statutory period.
- Can departmental proceedings be initiated against a government servant after their retirement?
- What is the limitation period for instituting departmental proceedings against a government pensioner under the West Pakistan Civil Servants Rules?
- Is a departmental proceeding valid if it is commenced more than one year after the retirement of a government servant?
- Rule 18, West Pakistan Civil Servants Rules
ORDER
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.- Petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment dated 12.8.2005 passed by the learned Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi in appeal was accepted and the impugned orders dated 2.1.2003 and 16.5.2003 passed by the petitioners were set aside.
2. It is contended by Kazi Khalid Ali, Additional Advocate-General Sindh that respondent is involved in the embezzlement of Rs. 1,10,85,834.80 and that embezzlement according to him took place during 1994 to 1997 while respondent was posted as Additional Deputy Commissioner/Additional District Magistrate, Jacobabad. He referred to show-cause notice dated 5.3.2002 whereby embezzlement has been shown from 1991 to 1995-1996. He also referred to another Notification dated 5.3.2002 wherein it was mentioned that the respondent has retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 29.1.2002.
3. Though heard at length, but the learned Additional Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the petitioners has not been able to point out any irregularity or illegality in impugned judgment.
Admittedly, the case of the petitioners hit by Rule 18 West Pakistan Civil Servants Rule, whereby it is mandatory that departmental proceedings shall not be instituted after more than a year from the date retirement of Government pensioners, In. The instant case, it has been admitted that no such proceedings have yet commenced.
4. Accordingly, finding no merit in the petition the same dismissed and leave to appeal refused.