MUHAMMAD AYUB vs PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal regarding the enhancement of a service penalty. The petitioner, a Pakistan Railways employee, was initially punished with compulsory retirement following charges of submitting a fake school leaving certificate and concealing a prior criminal conviction. Subsequently, the Divisional Superintendent, exercising suo motu powers under the Pakistan Railways Personnel Manual, issued a show-cause notice to enhance the penalty to dismissal from service. The core legal question was whether the reviewing authority could arbitrarily enhance a penalty without assigning specific reasons. The Supreme Court held that while the Divisional Superintendent possesses the discretion to revise penalties, such power cannot be exercised arbitrarily. The Court found that the enhancement of the sentence without recording sufficient justification rendered the order illegal, particularly given the petitioner's 24 years of service and the competent authority's initial assessment. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order, restoring the original penalty of compulsory retirement, establishing the principle that discretionary powers in reviewing administrative punishments must be exercised reasonably and supported by recorded reasons.
- Can a reviewing authority enhance a disciplinary penalty without recording reasons for such enhancement?
- Is the exercise of suo motu revisional powers by a Divisional Superintendent in service matters subject to judicial review?
- Does the mere existence of a discrepancy in a birth certificate constitute conclusive proof of a fake document in disciplinary proceedings?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules 1973
- Para 1724, Pakistan Railways Personnel Manual
- Para 1725, Pakistan Railways Personnel Manual
' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.---This petition under Article 212 (3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has been preferred seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 31-7-2001 passed by Federal Service Tribunal Islamabad, in a service appeal.
2. The petitioner, a carpenter of CDL Workshop Pakistan Railways, Rawalpindi, was proceeded against under Government Servants (E&D) Rules 1973 for the following charges:-- "(a) You produced fake school leaving certificate at the time of your appointment as "Muawan" in the year 1976 showing vour date of birth as 15-9-1952.
(b) You were also convicted by the Court of law in case F.1.R. No, 1102 dated 7-1-1955. You were awarded a sentence of rigorous imprisonment (RI) for seven years, but this fact was concealed by you.''
3. The Inquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges and the competent authority in the light of findings of Inquiry Officer while taking a lenient view, awarded him the punishment of compulsory retirement from service vide order dated 11-5-2000. However, the Divisional Superintendent, Pakistan Railways, Rawalpindi in exercise of his powers under paras 1724 and 1725 of RI Personnel Manual, issued a show cause notice dated 29-8-2000 to the petitioner for enhancement of penalty from compulsory retirement to dismissal from service. The petitioner in reply to the show cause notice pleaded that the order passed by the competent authority attained finality for want of challenge through a departmental appeal and the same being just and proper, would call no interference.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Divisional Superintendent without assigning any reason, interfered in the order passed by competent authority and revised the quantum of punishment. The learned Deputy Attorney-General on the other hand, has contended that the Divisional Superintendent having considered the nature of charge was of the view that the penalty imposed by the competent authority was inadequate, therefore, deemed it proper to revise the punishment and that the discretion exercised by him was not suffering from any legal defect to be interfered by the Tribunal.
5. According to the record of Directorate General of Registration, Government of Pakistan the petitioner was born in 1936 whereas his date of birth in the school leaving certificate is mentioned as 15-9-1952 which may lead to the conclusion that the school leaving certificate of the petitioner was not bearing the correct date of his birth but this contradiction itself would not be a conclusive proof- of his school leaving certificate to be a fake document rather the inference would be drawn that the age of the petitioner at the time of joining the service was much more to that of the age given in the certificate and this would also be confirmed by the fact that in the year 1955 a criminal case was registered against the petitioner when he was of grown up age and not an infant child of three years. The petitioner served the department for 24 years with clean service record and probably the competent authority keeping in view this aspect of the matter, took a lenient view and awarded him the punishment of compulsory retirement from service. Undoubtedly, the Divisional Superintendent in exercise of his suo motu powers could revise the order passed by the competent authority after giving show-cause notice to the petitioner but the use of discretionary powers in the matter of quantum of sentence must not be arbitrary and the enhancement of sentence by the reviewing authority without recording reasons, would render the order illegal.
6. We having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and find that the discretion exercised by the Divisional Superintendent in the matter of quantum of punishment was without any justification and the punishment awarded to the petitioner by the competent authority would sufficiently meet the ends of justice in the given facts. We therefore, convert this petition into 'appeal and set aside the order of Tribunal. The appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.