MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB
ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHRY (MEMBER). ‑ Muhammad Aslam Ex- Constable No. 150, has filed his appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 wherein he has impleaded Province of Punjab through Secretary, Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Lahore. Inspector -General of Police, Punjab Lahore, Superintendent of Police, Sheikhupura and D. I.‑G., Gujranwala Range, as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the impugned orders No. 14133‑3, dated 22nd April, 1979. 24039‑40/L. C. dated 2nd December, 1979 and No. 18164‑66 M. V. dated 28th June 1980 of dismissal of the appellant from service and rejection of his appeals, revision‑cum‑mercy petition passed by the 3, 4 and 2, respectively be declared illegal, void and having no legal effect be set aside and the appellant be re‑instated into service with all back benefits.
3. Brief history of the case is that the appellant was posted as Police Constable at Police Station, Narang. Tehsil Ferozewala, District Sheikhu pura. The appellant went ca leave without prior sanction and absented himself from duty as detailed below :
Months Days Hours Minutes
10‑8‑1978 to 30‑8‑1978 ‑ 20 1 55
3-9‑1978 to 4‑10‑19781 - 30 16 33
21‑10‑1978 to 2‑11‑1978 ‑ 11 17 ‑
3-11‑1978 to 14‑2‑1979 3 12 ‑‑‑ ‑
------------------------------------------
5 14 11 30
------------------------------------------
The appellant was served with a show‑cause notice No. 8724. dated 8th March, 1979 for one of the major penalties including dismissal from service by way of General Police proceedings in which departmental enquiry was not considered necessary. He submitted his reply to the show‑cause notice. In reply to the show‑cause notice the appellant stated that he suffered from jaundice. He was advised by the doctors for com plete rest and for that reason he could not get leave sanction and remained away. He also enclosed photo copies of three medical certificates with this reply to show‑cause notice, to prove his illness, issued by Incharge Primary' Rural Health Centre Shah Kot, for the period from 15 th November, 1978 to 24th January, 1979 and 25th January 1979 to 14 th February, 1979, which were not accepted by the punishing authority. The third medical certificate relates to his fitness to resume duty w. e. f. 15 th February, 1979.
The appellant did not appear before Superintendent of Police, Sheikbu pura for personal hearing. He was summoned on many occasions for personal hearing but he did not appear He again absented himself from Police Lines w.‑e. f. 26th March, 1979 to 7th April, 1979 without sanction of leave. On his arrival in Police Lines on 10th April, 1979, he received show‑cause notice for personal hearing on 11 th April, 1979 wherein he was informed that in case of his failure to do so ex parte proceedings would be taken against him. The appellant did not appear for personal hearing on 11th April, 1979 and instead he against absented himself from duty w. e. f. 14th April, 1979 and remained absent thereafter. He was held guilty of misconduct and absent from duty and was dismissed from service w. e. f. 14th April, 1979. The appellant performed an appeal to the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Gujranwala Range, at Lahore. He was heard in person by D. I.‑G and this appeal was rejected on 8th December, 1979. He filed another revision‑cum‑mercy petition to the Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, which was also rejected on 28th June, 1981. Hence this appeal.
4. During the proceedings of the case the learned counsel for the appellant tiled an application for summoning Dr. Muhammad Nazir Chaudary, Medical Officer and Razzak Ahmad, Junior Clerk of S. P.'s Office, Sheikhupura to give evidence to show that the appellant was in fact suffering from jaundice and had submitted the applications for granting of leave accompanied with the medical certificate. This application was allowed by us and we recorded the statement. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney on behalf of the respondents. It has been argued on behalf of the appellant that as borne out from the statement of Razzak Ahmad, A. W. II the appellant came to submit the medical certificates to the concerned Clerk in the Office of S. P., Sheikhupura. For reasons best known to the respondents, he has denied the receipt of applications and medical certificates submitted by the appellant for the total period of his absence. He has also argued with vehemence that the Medical Officer appearing as A. W. 1 has stated on oath that he had examined the appellant who was suffering from ineffective hepetations or jaundice. He has also submitted that the medical certi ficates, Exh. D. 1, Exh. D. 2 and Exh. D. 3 are fully proved on record. He has further argued that the action of the competent authority in rejec tion of the medical certificates unilaterally, under the circumstances, is ultra vires the rules. On the other hand, the learned District Attorney while taking us through the statements of Medical Officer Dr. M. Nazir Chaudary, A. W. I, and Razzak Ahmad, A. W. II, has submitted that the certificates Exh. D. 3, is not proved on record because the author of the certificates i. e. Dr. A. H. Malik has not been produced as witness. He has also submitted that the medical certificates, Exh. D. 1, is forged docu ment, which contains overwritings and is also retrospective in nature because the appellant was examined by the Medical Officer on first and last time on 14th February, 1979 he issued him a medical certificate w. e. f. 25th January, 1979. Concluding the arguments the learned District Attorney has submitted that the medical certificates on the record are fake and also the total period of the absence is not covered by any leave application or medical certificates. The statement of Razzak Ahmad, A. W. 11, is interested witness, does not ring truth and is not inspiring confidence. The learned District Attorney has also argued that according to the evidence of the A. W. I, Dr. M. Nazir Chaudary, the appellant could travel by bus and thus there was no earthly reason as to why he did not approach the S. P.'s Office for obtaining a docket to obtain medical assistance and certificates, particularly when his village is connected with Sheikhupura with mettled road, a distance of 35 miles, and the transport was easily available.
5. We have given our anxious thoughts to the arguments put for ward by the learned District Attorney and have also perused to record very carefully. It is clear that the appellant' absented himself wilfully on 10th August, 1978 and remained absent up to 14th February, 1979 on different occasions in the first instance. He again absented himself w. e. f. 26th March, 1979 and remained so up to 9th April, 1979 without sanction leave. He arrived in the Police Lines on 10th April, 1979, went away on 14th April, 1979 and absented from duty thereafter. He did not submit any leave application availed leave without sanction, on the pretest of being suffering from jaundice. Only two medical certificates are available on record which are for the period from 15th November, 1978 to 24th January, 1979 and 25th January, 1979 to 14th February, 1979. We agreed with the arguments of the learned District Attorney, authen ticity of medical certificates is not free from doubts. We have gone through the evidence of the witnesses of the appellant. Razzak Ahmad, A. W. 11 has stated that the appellant had visited office of the S. P. and had handed over the medical certificates to the concerned clerk. We are afraid that we cannot accept this version because he failed to name the concerned clerk, who was also not produced as witness. Admittedly, he is the village follow of the appellant and is an interested witness ; as such no reliance can be placed on him. Similarly while going through the statements of the Medical Officer A. W. 1, we can safely conclude that it does not inspire the confidence. It is very clear from the statement of the certificates, Exh. D. I to Exh. D. 3, that he had examined the appellant only once on 14th February, 1979 but surprisingly he chose to certify his illness from 25th January, 1979 to the date of his examination (Exh. D. 1). We fail to understand as to how could he certify illness for the past dates when he did not examine the appellant previously. It is also interesting to note that simultaneously, he has also issued a witness certificate to the appellant on the same date (Exh. D. 2), which clearly proves that the appellant was not at all sick. So far as the medical certificates, Exh. D. 3 is concerned its author Dr. A. H. Malik has not been produced as a wit ness and it has not been proved on record. Thus, there was no reason for Dr. M. Nazir Chaudhary, Medical Officer to countersign the certificate, Exh. D. 3, on 14th February, 1979 after expiring of three months period of its issue, particularly, when he was not familiar with the handwriting and signatures of the said doctor. In view of the above discussion of his evidence, no reliance can be placed upon it. As such it is proved beyond any doubts that the appellant wilfully absented himself and when show cause notice was served upon him, then he managed two medical certi ficates, genuineness of those is doubtful. His village was at a distance of 35 miles from Sheikhupura and that too linked with a mettled road. Trans port was easily available. If according to him, he could go to Shabkot to get the medical certificates, he could easily go to Sheikhupura to report to his office for getting the leave sanctioned. He, even, did not bother to appear in person before the Superintendent of Police, Sheikhupura in spite of the fact that he was summoned on many occasions. Further more, he did receive a show‑cause notice on 10th April, 1979 in the Police Lines for personal hearing for 11th April, 1979 but he failed to appear and instead again absented himself from duty w. e. f. 14th April, 1979. These facts proved that he is guilty of wilful absence and misconduct. It appears that he lost interest in service and wilfully absconded.
6. Keeping the above facts, in view, we hold that there is no merit in the appeal which is dismissed as such.
There will be no orders as to costs.
M. I. Appeal dismissed.