WAPDA Through Its Chairman vs SHUJAAT ALI BAGHDADI
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by WAPDA against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had condoned the delay in filing an appeal by the respondent, Shujaat Ali Baghdadi, and altered his punishment from removal from service to retirement. The respondent had a severe disciplinary record, including making wild allegations against staff, blackmailing officers and lady workers, insulting modesty, criminal intimidation, impersonating a military officer, and sending filthy letters. The core legal question before the Supreme Court is whether the Tribunal was justified in granting the benefit of retirement and altering the punishment given the grave misconduct established on record. The Supreme Court granted leave to consider the arbitrary exercise of discretion by the Tribunal in altering the punishment contrary to public policy. The principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will examine whether service tribunals exercise their discretion judiciously when altering departmental punishments in cases of gross misconduct.
- Whether the Service Tribunal was justified in giving the benefit of retirement to the respondent in the circumstances of the case?
- Can the Service Tribunal arbitrarily alter the punishment of an employee found guilty of grave misconduct?
- Whether the alteration of punishment in cases involving blackmailing and gross indiscipline is against public policy?
ORDER
1. JAVID IQBAL, J.--Shujaat Ali Baghdadi respondent had appealed against the order of his removal from service. The appeal was barred by time but the Federal Service Tribunal condoned the delay and proceeded to decide his appeal on merits. The findings of the Tribunal were that from the record it was evident that the respondent had made wild allegations against the Chief Engineer and other members of the staff. He blackmailed various officers including lady workers and for that reason he was even arrested by Martial Law authorities. He is stated to have insulted the modesty of Miss Rafia Butt and criminally intimidated and threatened her of dire consequences. The Tribunal observed that the record of the respondent showed a black picture. He was suspended for misconduct but was then re-instated. He blackmailed an officer and created Sindhi-Punjabi issue.
2. He was in the habit of sending filthy letters to officers and using dirty language. He used to make anxious calls to the officers and he impersonated as a Military Officer to threaten his superiors. On the basis of this evidence on record the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that he was not a fit person who should be allowed to remain in service of the WAPDA. But in spite of it the Tribunal accepted his appeal to the extent that the order of removal was altered to that of retirement from service.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it was against public policy to alter the punishment awarded to the respondent in the circumstances of the case and that the discretion had been exercised arbitrarily by the Tribunal since it has been passing contradictory judgments in regards to the alteration of punishment.
4. We grant leave inter alia to consider as to whether the Tribunal in the circumstances of this case was justified in giving the benefit of retirement to the respondent and thus altering the punishment