Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NAZIR ALI VS Respondent: SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, THAL CANAL CIRCLE
1980 P L C (C
1980 P L C (C. S.) 89
[Service Tribunal Punjab]
Present : M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman, Mazhar Munir and S. Hafeezur Rehman, Members
NAZIR ALI
Versus
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, THAL CANAL CIRCLE
Appeal No. 210/322 of 1978, decided on 5th September, 1979.
Civil service‑‑
‑‑‑‑ Punishment on grounds extraneous to charge‑sheet‑Not sustain able‑Appellant retired firstly on basis of an old application seeking retirement and also for some allegations not mentioned in charge sheet‑Retirement order, in circumstances, set aside.
JUDGMENT
M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).‑-----Mr. Nazir Ali Patwari, is aggrieved by the order dated 1‑3‑1978 whereby he was permitted to retire w. e. f. 5‑11‑1976. The appeal against this order was dismissed the Superintending Engineer on 7‑6‑78. The facts of the case are that Nazir Ali Patwari was a habitual absentee. As a result a charge‑sheet was issued by the Executive Engineer, Leiah Division under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules. While the Executive Engineer found him guilty and instead of dismissing him he took a lenient view and an old application of patwari for retirement was dug out and he was allowed to retire with effect from 5‑11‑1976.
We have heard the parties. We are of the opinion that, firstly, no action should have been taken on an old application requesting for retirement. Moreover, the order in this case contains reference to a charge which was not included in the original charge sheet. This is regarding the loss of Rs. 188, A suffered by the Government as a result of some action on the part of the Patwari. We find that extraneous matters have been brought in while deciding the case which should have been dealt with only on the basis of the original‑charge‑sheet. Acceptance of retirement could also not be made with retrospective effect. In vied of these violations the orders of XEN are untenable and are, therefore, set aside.
Appeal accepted.