MUZAFFAR ALI vs COMMANDANT RANGERS and another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Service Tribunal, which upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, a Hawaldar in the Pakistan Rangers, for misconduct. The core legal question was whether the petitioner's prolonged absence from duty, spanning two years, eleven months, and five days, constituted sufficient grounds for the major penalty of dismissal, despite the petitioner's claim that his absence was due to unavoidable circumstances involving his involvement in a criminal case. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner failed to provide a justifiable explanation for his extended unauthorized absence. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner did not inform the department of his status even after his acquittal in the criminal proceedings. Consequently, the Court found the penalty of dismissal to be warranted given the nature of the disciplined force involved. The Court affirmed that in the absence of a question of law of public importance, interference under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 is not justified. The petition was dismissed for lacking merit.
- Does an extended period of unauthorized absence from a disciplined force constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal from service?
- Is a claim of unavoidable circumstances due to criminal litigation a valid defense against charges of prolonged absence without leave?
- What criteria must be met to warrant interference by the Supreme Court in service matters under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---Petitioner while serving as Hawaldar in Pakistan Rangers was proceeded against on charges of misconduct with the allegation that he remained absent without leave on various dates and in one stretch for a period of 2 years 11 months and 5 days. The inquiry proceedings culminated in the award of major penalty of dismissal from service, his departmental appeal failed and appeal before the Service Tribunal was also dismissed vide the impugned judgment.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was absent on account of unavoidable circumstances; that he was falsely involved in a case registered vide F.I.R. No,396 dated 30-5-2004 under section 324/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Ghulam Muhammadabad, Faisalabad, that on account of the said case petitioner's entire family absconded; that there was nobody who could inform the department and therefore, he informed the department immediately after his acquittal on 23-6-2007.
3. Mr. Muhammad Arshad, Inspector Legal, defends the impugned judgment and submits that a regular inquiry was conducted; that petitioner was given personal hearing by the Director-General Rangers and that his absence without leave for such a long time was a serious act of misconduct, which could not be countenanced in a disciplined force like Pakistan Rangers.
4. Having heard petitioner's learned counsel and Inspector Legal and having gone through the impugned judgment, we find that there is absolutely no justifiable explanation for his absence for the afore-referred long period of 2 years 11 months and 5 days. Even after his acquittal, he did not inform the department for more than a week. The penalty awarded has not been found by us to be unwarranted in the facts and circumstances of this case. Petitioner's learned counsel has not raised any question of law of public importance in terms of Article 212(3) of the Constitution to warrant interference. The petition lacking in merit is accordingly dismissed.