MUHAMMAD AHMAD SHAFFI vs S.E. IRRIGATION (HEADQUARTER), LAHORE and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed against the order of the Service Tribunal, which had partially accepted the petitioner's appeal regarding a departmental inquiry. A departmental inquiry was initiated against the petitioner alleging a government loss of Rs. 30,840 due to store shortages resulting from negligence. The Inquiry Officer held the petitioner responsible for shortages totaling Rs. 8,461, leading to the imposition of a major penalty for recovery under Rule 7-A of the Efficiency & Discipline Rules, 1975. The Service Tribunal set aside the liability regarding diesel oil but maintained the recovery of Rs. 7,625 for the shortage of fixtures. The core legal question is whether the Service Tribunal or the departmental authority committed any error of law or procedure in imposing the penalty and sustaining the partial recovery. The Supreme Court held that no error of law or procedure was pointed out, noting that the Tribunal had already taken a sympathetic view granting partial relief, and consequently dismissed the petition. The key principle established is that factual findings of administrative authorities and service tribunals regarding departmental inquiries and store shortages, free from legal or procedural defects, do not warrant interference by the Supreme Court.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with factual findings of a Service Tribunal in a departmental inquiry absent any error of law or procedure?
- Can a major penalty for recovery of loss be sustained when the Service Tribunal has already granted partial relief by setting aside a portion of the shortage liability?
- Rule 7-A, Efficiency & Discipline Rules 1975
ORDER
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--A departmental inquiry was held against the petitioner on the allegation that the Government had suffered a loss of Rs,30,840 in connection with the shortage of the stores resulting from his negligence.
2. ' The Inquiry Officer held the petitioner responsible for the following shortages:- {{TABLE}}
(i) 209 Gallons light Diesel Oil @ Rs,4 per Gallon. = Rs,836.00
(ii) Shortage of fixture (doors and windows) = Rs,7,625.00 Total = Rs,8,461.00 {{TABLE}} Eventually, the Authority accepted the recommendations of the Inquiry Officer and imposed a major penalty (under Rule 7-A of the Efficiency & Discipline Rules, 1975) for the recovery of Rs,8,461 suffered by the Government.
3. ' The Service Tribunal found that the shortage of 209 Gallons light Diesal Oil amounting to Rs,836 could not be attributed to the petitioner but the shortage in connection with the fixture (doors and windows) amounting to Rs,7,625 has been satisfactorily established before the .Administrative authority and, accordingly, partially accepted the appeal holding that only a sum of Rs,7,625 i.e, loss suffered in connection with the shortage on account of the fixture (doors & windows) etc. Could be recovered from him. The petitioner has now moved this. Court seeking leave to appeal against the order of the Service Tribunal.
4. ' Ch. Muhammad Aslant Sandhi', Advocate for the petitioner, has been heard. He has not been able to point out any error of law or procedure committed by the departmental authority for imposing the penalty upon him. The Service Tribunal in fact, has taken a sympathetic view of the matter and granted partial relief.
5. ' No further interference is possible.
6. ' This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed hereby.