KHAN MUHAMMAD NIAZI vs THE SECRETARY, COOPERATION, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
The petitioner, a former Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, challenged the withholding of 50% of his pension following disciplinary proceedings initiated after his retirement. The proceedings were conducted under the West Pakistan Civil Service Pension Rules, 1963, regarding allegations of misconduct, including inefficiency, registration of fictitious societies, and misappropriation of crop loans. After the departmental inquiry established five out of six charges, the petitioner's departmental appeal was rejected, and his subsequent appeal to the Punjab Service Tribunal was also dismissed. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner contended that the evidence did not support the findings of misconduct. The Supreme Court held that disciplinary proceedings leading to the withholding of pension are permissible against a civil servant even after retirement. Regarding the evidentiary challenge, the Court determined that the sufficiency of evidence to support the charges was a question of fact, not law. Finding no substantial question of law of public importance, the Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the charges were not without foundation.
- Can disciplinary proceedings be initiated against a civil servant after their retirement?
- Does the withholding of pension based on findings of misconduct constitute a substantial question of law if the petitioner disputes the sufficiency of evidence?
- Rule 1.8, West Pakistan Civil Service Pension Rules, 1963
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society at Rajanpur. On 14-1-1982, he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. After his retirement, it was found that he was involved in a number of irregularities while holding the office of Assistant Registrar. Consequently, action was taken against him under Rule 1.8 of the West Pakistan Civil Service Pension Rules, 1963 and a charge-sheet was served upon him in December, 1982. A regular departmental inquiry was held as a result of which his pension to the extent of 50% was withheld.
After his departmental appeal failed, he filed an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. His appeal was dismissed by the learned Tribunal. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. It is not disputed by the learned counsel that on account of misconduct disciplinary proceedings leading to withholding of whole or part of pension could be taken against a civil servant even after he had retired from service. The Department framed 6 charges against him. The Inquiry Officer found 5 of these to have been established. These were; inefficiency in the discharge of official duties, registration of bogus/fictitious societies without proper scrutiny, fixation/enhancement of M.C.Ls of Societies deliberately in haphazard manner with ulterior motive, failure to conduct scrutiny of societies prior to the advancement of loans and misuse of official position in violation of service conduct rule, leading to misappropriation of crop loans amounting to about a million of rupees in Rabi 1981-82 drawn from the Punjab Provincial Co-operative Bank Ltd., Rajanpur.
3. The learned counsel contended that on the evidence on record none of these allegations could be said to have been established. The question whether there was sufficient evidence to support the charges against the petitioner was one of fact and we are not persuaded that the said charges were without any foundation. No substantial question of law of public importance arises in this case. The petition is dismissed.