ISHTIAQ AHMED vs INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOMETAX
The petitioner, an Inspector in the Income-tax Department, faced disciplinary proceedings resulting in the withholding of one future increment as a minor penalty following allegations of misconduct. His departmental appeal was dismissed as time-barred, and his subsequent appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal was initially dismissed on the ground that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear appeals against minor penalties. Upon a prior appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held that the Tribunal was indeed competent, and the matter was remanded. The Tribunal again dismissed the appeal on merits. The petitioner then sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, contending that the inquiry was conducted in his absence without proper association and relied on personal inquiries without affording him an opportunity to refute them. The Supreme Court found that the contentions raised needed examination and granted leave to appeal.
- Whether the Federal Service Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the imposition of a minor penalty?
- Can a disciplinary inquiry be validly conducted ex parte without associating the accused employee?
- Whether an inquiry officer can base findings on personal inquiries without giving the accused an opportunity to refute them?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner is an Inspector in the Income-tax Department. There were allegations against him that he had made false complaints against his colleagues, paid unauthorised visits to the assessees, seized their documents without proper authority and extracted money from them. Disciplinary proceedings were taken against him. An inquiry was held and on the basis of the findings of the Inquiry Officer he was served with a show-cause notice. After he had been given an opportunity of being heard the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner directed that his one future increment falling due on 1-12-1987 be withheld. He filed an appeal against the penalty imposed upon him but addressed it incorrectly to the Regional Commissioner of Income- tax. The Regional Commissioner sent the memorandum of appeal to the Commissioner of Income- tax. By the time the memorandum reached the Commissioner the appeal had become barred by time. The Commissioner dismissed it on that ground. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. It was dismissed on the ground that the Tribunal was not competent to hear an appeal against an order imposing a minor penalty. He challenged the order of the learned Tribunal before this Court. His appeal was accepted and the Tribunal was held competent to hear the appeal against even a minor penalty. The matter was then remanded to the learned Tribunal for a fresh decision. After the remand the learned Tribunal again dismissed the appeal with the following observations: "After hearing the parties, we find that the minor penalty imposed on the appellant was done after careful consideration of the facts and following the prescribed procedure and the question of appellant being recently appointed and new in service does absolve him for not following the prescribed rules/procedure. Even the minor penalty of withholding one future increment falling on 1-12-1987 was quite lenient and waiving off/setting aside the penalty was not substantiated and justified. We accordingly dismiss the appeal as having no merits and substance."
' The petitioner again seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. It is stated in support of this petition that the learned Tribunal failed to take into account the various contentions raised by the petitioner. In this case the Inquiry Officer had held the inquiry in his absence without associating him therewith and based his finding on personal enquiries without giving him an opportunity to refute them. Thus, no order of punishment could be based on his finding.
3. The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave is granted.
Cited by 1 case
- and Muhammad Ayub Khan, MemberMUMTAZ ALI CHANGEZI and another 2000 PLC (C.S.) 484