Rana ABDUL GHAFFAR KHAN vs THE PUNJAB GOVERNMENT
The petitioner, a Magistrate, sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of his service appeal by the Service Tribunal, which had upheld the rejection of his representation for the expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his annual confidential report by the District and Sessions Judge regarding his judicial work and persistence in wrong views. The core legal question was whether the Service Tribunal erred in refusing to expunge the adverse remarks based on the assessment of the judicial head of the district. The Supreme Court held that the assessment made by the District and Sessions Judge, founded on orders and judgments reviewed in appeals and revisions, constituted an honest assessment of the petitioner's work that warranted no interference. The court established the principle that a judicial head of a district's honest assessment of a subordinate judicial officer's performance, based on concrete judicial review, carries credence and will not be lightly interfered with by appellate tribunals.
- Whether adverse remarks recorded in the annual confidential report of a judicial officer can be expunged when based on the assessment of the District and Sessions Judge?
- Does the Service Tribunal have the authority to interfere with an honest assessment of a judicial officer's work by the judicial head of a district?
- Can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal against the concurrent findings of the Service Tribunal regarding adverse ACR remarks?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner was a Magistrate posted in Faisalabad. In his annual confidential report for the period falling between 4-7-81 and 31-12-81 the District and Sessions Judge made the following remarks:- "Forms wrong views and then persists in them; is not open to correction."
' These remarks were communicated to the petitioner. He made a representation for expunction which was rejected by the Government. He then filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal but this too met with no success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. While rejecting the appeal of the petitioner, the learned Tribunal observe d:- "In the present case, what we find is that the learned Sessions Judge besides making reference to the events of 1982, has reported that his assessment was based on various orders and judgments which came before him in appeals and revisions that he formed opinion that the appellant was formulating wrong views and then was persisting in the same. It would not be possible for us to disbelieve a positive statement made by the Judicial Head of a District, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that no exception can be taken to an honest assessment of work of the appellant which came under review from time to time before the learned Sessions Judge."
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are unable to accept his contention that the adverse remarks were entirely unfounded and the learned Tribunal erred in not expunging them. The petition is dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Ch. SHABBIR HUSSAIN and others vs REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE, and others 2004 PLC (C.S.) 236
- Ch. SHABBIR HUSSAIN and otherss vs REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE and others 2004 PLD Supreme Court 191
- Ch. Shabbir Hussain and others vs Registrar Lahore High Court, Lahore and others 2004 PLJ SC 84