Khan MUHAMMAD KHAN vs THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
This is a petition for special leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal against departmental action resulting in his removal from service and an order for the recovery of the value of missing wheat. The petitioner, serving as a Food Grain Inspector, faced departmental proceedings following allegations of selling wholesome wheat as damaged wheat and a subsequent shortage of 346.85 metric tons of wheat stored under his supervision. The core legal question before the court was whether any illegality or irregularity was committed during the course of the departmental proceedings that warranted interference with the Tribunal's decision. The Supreme Court held that the disciplinary action was taken in accordance with the relevant service rules, both penalties imposed were authorized by the rules, and no illegality or irregularity was pointed out in the proceedings. Consequently, the court laid down that where departmental action is regularly conducted under applicable service rules without procedural defects and no substantial question of public importance arises, leave to appeal will be refused. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether departmental proceedings resulting in removal from service and recovery of losses can be interfered with when conducted in accordance with relevant rules?
- Does a petition against the dismissal of a service appeal by the Punjab Service Tribunal raise a substantial question of public importance in the absence of procedural illegality?
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment, dated 15-5- 1982 of the Punjab Service Tribunal dismissing the petitioner's appeal against the departmental action taken against him.
2. The petitioner was serving as Food Grain Inspector at Doonga Boonga in Tehsil Bahawalnagar.
He purchased 3623.5 metric tons of wheat during the season 1976-77 and stored it in different locations. On the allegation that he was selling wholesome wheat as damaged wheat his stores were raided by the Anti-Corruption Establishment under the supervision of a Magistrate. He was arrested and remained in custody till he was bailed out. After his release he did not attend his office on one pretext or the other. Subsequently, the wheat purchased by him was dispatched to other locations. It was then found that there was a shortage of 346.85 metric tons. Consequently departmental proceedings were initiated against him. As a result of the departmental proceedings he was removed from service and a direction was given that a sum of Rs.3,95,409 which represented the value of the missing wheat be recovered from him. He preferred a departmental appeal which was dismissed by the Director of Food. He then approached the Service Tribunal but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from the order of the Tribunal.
3. The action has been taken against the petitioner in accordance with the relevant disciplinary rules. Both the penalties awarded to him are provided by the said rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or irregularity that might possibly have been committed during the course of the departmental proceedings. This is an ordinary case where disciplinary action has been taken by the Government in accordance with the service rules applicable to the petitioner. No substantial question of public importance arises here. The petition is accordingly dismissed.