Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NOOR ELAHI KHAN VS Respondent: SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
1992 P L C (C
1992 P L C (C.S.) 36
[Service Tribunal Punjab]
Present: Muhammad Mahmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman
NOOR ELAHI KHAN
Versus
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB EDUCATION DEPARTMENT and another
Appeal No.504/442 of 1987, decided on 24th September, 1989.
Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)----
----S.4---Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, Rr.4 & 5---Stoppage of increment---Appellant, a lecturer in Provincial Education Department, was selected an English Teacher for Algeria by Federal Ministry of Education---Appellant applied for "No Objection Certificate" to his deputation to Government of the Province, Education Department---Appellant was asked to join duty in Algeria on or before a specified date---Appellant's application for "No Objection Certificate" was under process when he was ordered telephonically by Federal Government to join duty before the specified date---Appellant was - accordingly relieved by his immediate superior i.e. Principal of the College and he left for Algeria assuming that his deputation would be sanctioned---Appellant, on return after two years when reported back for- duty, proceedings were initiated against him for wilful absence from duty-- Appellant was ultimately awarded punishment of stoppage of increments for two years---Department failed to initiate disciplinary proceedings against appellant till he reported for duty and as soon as he reported they started proceedings against him---Held, such action was not only illegal but undesirable and gave rise to many corrupt practices---Department had bounden duty to initiate proceedings against appellant the moment he absented himself from duty---Record showed that although appellant did not wait for sanction of his leave and proceeded abroad yet department had not performed their duty in a justified manner which paved way in favour of appellant---Penalty of censure was awarded to appellant instead of stoppage of increments for two years.
Shaukat Hussain Baluch for Appellant.
A.G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 31st August, 1989.