SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND vs GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and another
This matter arises from a petition filed against the order of the Sindh Service Tribunal upholding the recovery of financial loss from the petitioner's pension. The core legal question is whether a minor penalty of recovery of loss can be imposed upon a retired civil servant through a subsequent order without affording an opportunity of hearing or conducting a proper inquiry under the applicable rules, especially when the initial reinstatement order made no mention of any penalty. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the petitioner was prima facie condemned unheard, granted leave to appeal, and converted the petition into an appeal. The key principle laid down is that no adverse administrative order, including the imposition of financial penalties on pension, can be sustained if passed in violation of the principles of natural justice without issuing due notice and conducting a proper inquiry.
- Can a minor penalty of recovery from pension be imposed without issuing due notice and conducting a proper inquiry?
- Whether an administrative order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is sustainable?
- Is a civil servant entitled to procedural safeguards under the applicable rules before the imposition of a financial penalty?
- Removal from Service Ordinance, 2000
' SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.--- Mr. Ansari Abdul Latif, learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that the petitioner was proceeded against departmentally and the punishment of dismissal from service was imposed upon him which was never challenged before any forum.
However, he filed a Review Petition before the then Chief Minister, Sindh and per the summary he was reinstated with minor penalty being imposed upon him. However, per the order of reinstatement issued by the Government of Sindh there is no mention of any minor penalty at all.
Subsequently, the petitioner retired from service but surprisingly thereafter the Government of Sindh passed an order imposing a minor penalty upon the petitioner being recovery of the loss to the Government to the tune of Rs,11,31,916 from his pension/commutation. Thereafter the petitioner filed a departmental appeal without any success and then approached the learned Sindh Service Tribunal with the same result. Hence this petition.
2. Learned Advocate Supreme Court has submitted that according to the petitioner's reinstatement order dated 5-9-1997, there is no mention of any minor penalty and hence the same cannot be imposed without due notice to the petitioner and a proper inquiry under the Rules. Additionally, the Sindh Government E&D Rules were replaced by the Removal from Service Ordinance, 2000 on 30- 8-2000. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to be proceeded against under the said Rules which exercise has yet not taken place.
3. We have heard learned Advocate Supreme Court and perused the impugned judgment.
4. Prima facie it appears that the petitioner was condemned unheard. Hence we would, while granting leave, convert this petition into an appeal. To be listed in due course.