Ghous Bukhsh vs Commander (A&Q) Cholistan Rangers, Rahim Yar Khan
The petitioner, a member of the Cholistan Rangers, challenged his dismissal from service following a 12-day unauthorized absence. The petitioner contended that his absence was necessitated by an emergency involving his mother's accident. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner failed to obtain leave or submit a written application, and remained unreachable during his absence. Furthermore, the Court noted that this was the petitioner's third instance of unauthorized absence, with prior incidents occurring in 2010 and 2011. The Court held that unauthorized absence from a disciplined force constitutes serious misconduct, justifying disciplinary action. However, considering the petitioner's youth and potential for future employment, the Court determined that the penalty of dismissal was disproportionately severe as it barred him from all future government service. Consequently, the Court converted the petition into an appeal and partly allowed it, modifying the penalty from dismissal from service to removal from service, thereby mitigating the lifelong disqualification from government employment while upholding the disciplinary finding.
- Does unauthorized absence from a disciplined force constitute serious misconduct?
- Can the Supreme Court convert a penalty of dismissal from service to removal from service to mitigate the impact on future employment?
- Is a prior history of unauthorized absence a relevant factor in determining the severity of disciplinary punishment?
ORDER
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.---The petitioner was absent from duty for 12 days without obtaining leave. He was dismissed from service for such misconduct vide order dated 17.10.2106 passed by the Colonel Sector Commander , Cholistan Rangers, HQs, Rahim Yar Khan. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner had a genuine reason for his absence, namely , the involvement of his mother in an accident and therefore, he left his post in an emergency .
2. It is admitted that leave was not obtained by the petitioner nor was any written application submitted by him for seeking such leave. During the period of his absence his mobile phone remained switched off; so that when the Sector Commander on receipt of his SMS wanted to contact him he was not available. Thirdly , the petitioner's mother was admittedly advised rest for a few days after her thigh injury had been attended to. The petitioner did not have a valid reason to remain absent from duty for 12 days.
3. In the circumstances, the petitioner could have returned immediately thereafter which he did not. Petitioner belongs to a disciplined force/ service and his absence from duty without authorization is a serious misconduct.
This is happened for the third time during a span of his service. Earlier in 2010 when he remained absent for 7- days, and in 2011 when he was absent for 27 days, the petitioner was awarded punishment but without affecting right of service. In 2016, the highest pena lty of dismissal from service has been awarded to him. We agree with the action taken against the petitioner . However , the severity of the punishment of dismissal lies in the consequence that the petitioner cannot seek governme nt employment in any other department or office. He is an able bodied young man and may qualify for government employment where strict discipline is not enforced.
4. Consequently , this petition is converted into appeal and partly allowed converting the petitioner's penalty of dismissal into removal from service.