DIRECTOR (ESTABLISHMENT), S&GA DIVISION, WAPDA, LAHORE and another vs ASHIQ HUSSAIN KHAN
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by WAPDA against an order of the Federal Service Tribunal. The respondent, a stenographer, was removed from service following departmental proceedings for misconduct, including late attendance and using abusive language. While the Federal Service Tribunal upheld the finding of misconduct, it exercised its discretion to modify the penalty from removal from service to the stoppage of three increments. The core legal question presented to the Supreme Court is whether the Federal Service Tribunal possesses the jurisdiction to interfere with and reduce the quantum of penalty imposed by a departmental authority once the finding of guilt regarding misconduct has been affirmed. The Supreme Court, finding that this contention regarding the scope of the Tribunal's power to interfere with departmental penalties requires further examination, granted leave to appeal. The Court ordered that the interim order previously issued on 17-4-1989 shall remain in force during the pendency of the appeal proceedings.
- Does the Federal Service Tribunal have the legal authority to interfere with the quantum of penalty imposed by a departmental authority after upholding a finding of misconduct?
- Can the Federal Service Tribunal substitute the penalty of removal from service with a lesser penalty such as the stoppage of increments?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The respondent was serving as stenographer in the office of the Secretary, Rent Assessm ent Board, under the petitioner-authority. On charges, inter alia, of attending the office late and using filthy language against the Secretary when placed under suspension, departmental proceedings were taken against him. The Enquiry Officer found him guilty of misconduct and consequently after complying with the relevant rules, he was removed from service. He filed a departmental appeal which was dismissed. He then filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal uphckl the findings of the departmental authorities that the respondent was guilty of misconduct but reduced the penalty of removal from service to stoppage of three increments. The petitioner-authority seeks leave to appeal from the order of the learned Tribunal.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that after the learned Tribunal had upheld the finding on the question of misconduct, it was not open to it to interfere with the penalty imposed by the departmental authority on the respondent. This contention needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. The interim order already made on 17-4-1989 shall continue to remain in force during the pendency of the appeal.