GENERAL MANAGER, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS And Others vs FEDERAL SERVICE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the General Manager, Pakistan Railways and others against the judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal expunged an adverse annual confidential report for the period from 1-1-1994 to 31-12-1994 characterizing the respondent as an unwilling worker, allegedly done without mandatory pre-counselling under the rules. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the expungement of the adverse entry by the Service Tribunal was uncalled for given that fourteen other adverse reports containing advice for improvement had allegedly been issued on the same grounds, though not produced before the Tribunal. The Supreme Court granted leave to consider the contentions raised by the petitioners regarding the necessity of pre-counselling and the existence of multiple adverse reports. The holding of the Court is that leave to appeal is granted to examine whether the Service Tribunal's interference with the adverse entry was legally justified under the circumstances.
- Whether pre-counselling is a mandatory requirement under the rules before recording an adverse annual confidential report?
- Can the Service Tribunal expunge an adverse entry on the ground of lack of pre-counselling when multiple other adverse reports were issued?
- Is the non-production of other adverse reports before the Service Tribunal fatal to the department's case regarding an employee's performance?
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.---It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.2 approached the Service Tribunal with grievance that his annual confidential report for the period from 1-1-1994 to 31-12-1994 was adverse in nature alleging him to be as unwilling worker which was done without pre-counselling as is requirement under the rules. Written statement was filed on behalf of the petitioner department and the allegation was denied. In the result, after hearing, the adverse entry has been expunged by the Service Tribunal.
2. It has been urged before us that there was no need for pre-counselling for the reason that on the same ground fourteen other reports were issued by the department which were adverse in nature on the same ground with advice that he should improve his condition and become a willing worker.
These reports were not produced because there was no allegation in the service appeal of the petitioner that there were other entries against him which were adverse in nature. It is contended that in these circumstances expungment of the remarks was uncalled for.
3. Leave is granted to consider the above contentions.