FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN vs NAZIR AHMAD SWATI And Another
This appeal by the Federation of Pakistan challenged an order of the Federal Service Tribunal which had directed the reinstatement of the respondent, Nazir Ahmad Swati, into government service with full consequential benefits. The respondent had been retired from service under Martial Law Regulation No. 114. The core legal question was whether the respondent's retirement was justified based on the record, specifically regarding an adverse entry in his annual confidential report from 1969 while serving under the Government of N.-W.F.P. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, finding the order of reinstatement unexceptionable. The Court held that there were no valid grounds to justify the respondent's retirement, noting that the respondent had successfully completed his probation in the Ministry of Commerce and that no adverse reports were recorded against him during the remainder of his service. The Court concluded that it could be assumed the respondent had rectified the earlier reported defect. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming that retirement actions must be supported by valid, substantiated grounds rather than stale or rectified adverse remarks.
- Can a civil servant be retired based on an adverse annual confidential report entry that was subsequently rectified or not followed by further adverse reports?
- Does the successful completion of a probationary period imply the removal of prior defects in service record?
- Is the Federal Service Tribunal empowered to adjudicate appeals regarding retirement under Martial Law Regulation No. 114?
- Section 2, Civil Servants Act 1973
- Martial Law Regulation No. 114
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--The Federation of Pakistan through the present appeal has impugned the order of the Federal Service Tribunal, dated 31-10-1983, whereby the appeal of Nazir Ahmad Swati respondent was accepted and he was ordered to be re-instated in service with immediate effect with all the consequential benefits thereof.
2. The relevant facts, in brief, are that Nazir Ahmad Swati respondent was initially appointed by the Government of N.-W.F.P. As Civil Judge on 28-11-1962 and was confirmed on 15-6-1970. He was promoted to the post of Senior Civil Judge on 22-7-1970 when in the meantime he was selected by the Central Public Service Commission and was appointed as Deputy Registrar of the Trade Marks, Ministry of Commerce, Government of Pakistan, on 8-9-1970. During his service in the Federal Government on 18th April, 1972 he was retired from service under Martial .Law Regulation No.114 which was challenged by him by way of an appeal before the Service Tribunal. On objection being taken that the respondent was not a civil servant within the meaning of section 2 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, his appeal was dismissed on 16-7-1975 on the question of lack of jurisdiction by the Service Tribunal-. He challenged the finding of the Service Tribunal in this Civil Appeal No. K-109 of 1976 which was accepted on 23-2-1983 the case was remanded to the Service Tribunal to decide the afresh in accordance with law. The matter was then seized by the Federal Service Tribunal which accepted the appeal through the impugned judgment, hence this appeal.
3. Wehave heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. As the case stands we are of the view that the order of Service Tribunal is unexceptionable because no valid ground exists to order the retirement of the respondent. There appears to be only one entry in his annual confidential report for the year1969 while serving as Civil Judge with the Government of N.W.F.P., wherein it was recorded that the respondent did not appear outwardly living within his means and he was directed to remove this defect. This matter remained under correspondence for a considerably long time when finally the prayer of the respondent for the expunction of the adverse remarks was turned down.
4. We have been informed by the learned. Deputy Attorney- General that the appointment of the respondent in the Ministry of Commerce was one year---s probation which he successfully completed and was confirmed. The learned Deputy Attorney-General further submitted that during the rest of his service, no adverse report was recorded against him. In view of the above it can be assumed that the respondent has removed the defect reported by the Frontier Government in 1969. Under the circumstances the appeal fails and is dismissed on the ground other than the formulated in the leave granting order. It may also be pointed out that no other point was urged before us by the learned counsel for the appellant.