Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

2008 P L C (C

2008 P L C (C.S.) 1185

[Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal]

Present: Justice Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, Chairman, Justices Muhammad Bilal Khan and Syed Hamid Ali Shah, Members

KHAN TALIB HUSSAIN BALUCH

Versus

LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE through Registrar Service

Appeal No.16 of 2006, heard on 6th April, 2007.

Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act (XII of 1991)---

----S. 5---Adverse remarks, expunction of---Appeal---Appeal was directed against order whereby representation of appellant for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his A.C.R., was rejected---Appellant had joined the service as Additional District and Sessions Judge in the year 1984 and record had shown that there was no adverse entry in his previous A.C.Rs.---Nothing was on record to show as to how all of a sudden change was casual in conduct and behaviour of appellant---Alleged entry of adverse remarks was not supported by sufficient material and it had resulted in grave prejudice to the appellant---High Court vide Notification dated 3-7-2004 allowed to the appellant Selection grade BS-21---Parts-II, III and IV of A.C.R. of appellant showed that he had been graded as good and in Part-VI, (overall grading) appellant had been found good (better than the majority of officers)---Impugned entry, in circumstances was to some extent inconsistent with the entries of other parts of A.C.R.---Impugned order was set aside and adverse remarks recorded in the A.C.R. of the appellant for relevant period, were expunged.

Ejaz Muhammad Khan v. Province of Punjab 1983 PLC (C.S.) 303; Akhtar Ali v. Superintendent of Police, Toba Tek Singh and 3 others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 1089 and Muhammad Afzal Javed, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lahore v. Lahore High Court through Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore and 2 others 2003 PLC (C.S.) 1046 ref.

Akhtar Ali v. Superintendent of Police, Toba Tek Singh and 3 others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 1089 and Muhammad Afzal Javed, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lahore v. Lahore High Court through Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore and 2 others 2003 PLC (C.S.) 1046 rel.

Hafiz Tariq Naseem for Appellant.

Farooq Zaman Qurashi for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 6th April, 2007.

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI (CHAIRMAN).---This appeal is directed against the order, dated 7-10-2006, whereby representation of the appellant for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in A.C.R. for the period from 1-1-2004 to 15-10-2004 was rejected.

2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that appellant was posted as District and Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura and adverse remarks were recorded in his A.C.R. for the period from 1-1-2004 to 15-10-2004. The appellant filed representation for the expunction of adverse remarks but the same was rejected by the Authority on 7-10-2006. Hence this appeal.

3. Heard. Record perused.

4. As mentioned above, during the period from 1-1-2004 to 15-10-2004, the appellant was posted as District and Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura. The case of appellant is that he was recruited as Additional District and Sessions Judge in the year 1984 and his record was unblemished. He earned good reports and there was no adverse entry in his previous A.C.Rs. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that appellant was allowed selection grade BS-21, which shows that his service record is excellent. He has further argued that there is no complaint against the appellant. He submits that appellant would reach the age of superannuation on 12-6-2007 hence there are sufficient grounds to expunge the adverse remarks. He has placed reliance upon the case of Ejaz Muhammad Khan v. Province of Punjab 1983 PLC (C.S.) 303, Akhtar Ali v. Superintendent of Police, Toba Tek Singh and 3 others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 1089 and Muhammad Afzal Javed, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lahore v. Lahore High Court through Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore and 2 others 2003 PLC (C.S.) 1046.

5. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties with care.

6. As stated earlier, appellant joined the service as Additional District and Sessions Judge in the year, 1984 and record shows that there is no adverse entry in his previous A.C.Rs. There is nothing on record to show that how all of a sudden there was a change in conduct and the behaviour of the appellant. The entry is not supported by sufficient material. So it has resulted in grave prejudice to the appellant. Reliance can be placed upon cases Akhtar Ali v. Superintendent of Police, Toba Tek Singh and 3 others 1996 PLC (C.S.) 1089 and Muhammad Afzal Javed, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lahore v. Lahore High Court through Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore and 2 others 2003 PLC (C.S.) 1046. Admittedly, vide Notification No.125/RHC/D&SJJ, dated 3-7-2004, High Court allowed to the appellant selection grade BS-21. It is pertinent to note that in Parts-II, III and IV of A.C.R. the appellant has been graded as goad. Likewise in Part-VI (over all grading) he has been found good (better than the majority of officers). So impugned entry is to some extent inconsistent with the entries in other parts. In these circumstances, we find that impugned order, is not sustainable. So, this appeal is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the adverse remarks recorded in the A.C.R. of the appellant for the period from 1-1-2004 to 15-10-2004 are expunged. No order as to costs.

H.B.T./T-14/L Appeal allowed.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant