CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, ISLAMABAD vs AFTAB AHMED MEMON and others
This matter concerns two petitions for leave to appeal filed by the Chairman, Pakistan Railways, challenging an order of the Federal Service Tribunal. The Tribunal had set aside disciplinary orders that imposed minor punishments of withholding promotion for one year on two railway officials, Aftab Ahmed Khan and Muhammad Yousaf Somroo. The officials had been charged with negligence regarding station inspections and supervision of staff, specifically in relation to an accident at Ghotki Railway Station on June 8, 1991. The core legal question was whether the disciplinary action was sustainable given the officials' absence from the station at the time of the incident. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's findings, noting that the evidence established one official had left the station one month prior to the accident, and the other had left three months prior. Consequently, the Court held that they could not be held responsible for the accident. Finding no question of law of public importance, the Supreme Court dismissed the petitions and refused leave to appeal, affirming that disciplinary liability requires a nexus between the official's duties and the alleged failure.
- Can a public servant be held liable for a railway accident occurring at a station after they have been transferred from that station?
- Does the imposition of a minor punishment by a competent authority constitute a question of law of public importance sufficient to grant leave to appeal?
- Is a finding of fact by the Federal Service Tribunal regarding the absence of an official from the site of an incident sufficient to set aside disciplinary punishment?
1. ' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---We propose to dispose of above-noted two petitions for leave to appeal by this common judgment as the questions of facts and laws argued in both the petitions are identical. The petitioner, Chairman Pakistan Railways, is seeking leave to appeal in both the petitions, against the order of Federal Service Tribunal, dated 24-8-1994 whereby the learned Service Tribunal accepted the service appeals of the respondents (No,1) in the above petitions and set aside the order of the competent Authority imposing minor punishment of withholding promotion for one year.
2. ' Relevant facts of the cases are that Aftab Ahmed Khan, Divisional Personnel Officer, Pakistan Railways, Karachi (respondent No,1 in C.P. 510 of 1994) and Muhammad Yousaf Somroo, Assistant Director, Ministry of Railways, Islamabad (respondent No,1 in C.P. 511 of 1994) were charge sheeted on 31-7-1991 with identical allegations which were as follows:--- "(1) While conducting station inspections with special reference to Ghotki Station, you could not detect the non-observance by the station staff of the procedure laid down in para. 7.1 of the Appendix to the Station Working Rules regarding emergency operation.
(2) There was apparent general laxity in the working of your branch which you failed to control and overlooked the unauthorised methods employed by your staff to circumvent the Signalling System.
(3) You also failed to ensure that your subordinates performed their assigned duties effectively and efficiently."
3. ' Both the respondents contested the allegations and filed their reply. However, after holding enquiry both were found guilty and negligent and accordingly, minor punishment of withholding the promotion for one year was imposed in respect of both the respondents. On appeal, the learned Service Tribunal set aside the order of competent Authority in both the cases against which now the leave is sought by the petitioner.
4. ' It is an admitted position in the cases that both the respondents in the above petitions were charge-sheeted in connection with an accident at Ghotki Railway Station involving 'Tezgam' , which took place on 8-6-1991. The learned Tribunal found that respondent No,1 in Civil Petition No,510 of 1994 had left Sukkur on 8-5-1991 i.e,, one month before the accident which took place on 8-6-1991.
5. In the other case, namely Civil Petition No,511 of 1994, the learned Tribunal held that respondent No,1 had left the place 3 months before the accident which occurred on 8-6-1991. The learned Tribunal, accordingly, held that as the two respondents in the above petitions had left the Railway Station long before the accident, they could not be held responsible for the accident and accordingly, the order of Competent Authority imposing minor punishment of withholding promotion for one year, was not legal and valid order. The order passed by the learned Tribunal is unexceptional and even otherwise, we find that no question of law of public importance arises in these two cases so as to attract our jurisdiction. Both the petitions are, accordingly,I dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.