RASUL SHAH Versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS

This is an appeal challenging the decision dated 21‑1‑1987 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.7, Gujranwala whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for setting aside the punishment of reversion was dismissed.

2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was a Cabinman in scale No.5. A collision took place on 9‑7‑1984 between 17 Up Abasin Express and 370 Down Super Parcel Express and on the charge of absence on 3‑12‑1984, the appellant was removed from service. On a departmental appeal the order of termination of service was converted in to ,the order of reversion to the lower post.

3. It has been argued that only fact-finding enquiry was held but thereafter no enquiry in the presence of the appellant was held. The other defect pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant is that one of the members of the fact-finding enquiry namely Mr. Mumtaz was the officer who passed the order of removal from service. Since the punishment of removal from service does not stand, the fact that after fact-finding enquiry no further enquiry was held, is not fatal to the punishment of reversion awarded to the appellant. This is true that Mr. Mumtaz was the member of the enquiry committee and he alone passed the order of removal from service which is Exh.R‑8 but since the matter was reconsidered in appeal and the appellate authority ‑reduced and converted the punishment of removal B from service into reversion the defect stood cured, the appellant does not appear to have been prejudiced since an accident took place, the proper punishment was dismissal but the appellant stands reverted to the lower post. In these circumstances there appears to be no justification to interfere.

4. As a result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.

A.E./358/Lb.P Appeal dismissed.