Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Case No. 112 of 1978, decided on 13th December, 1979.
----R. 4‑Quantum of punishment‑Forest guard charged for serious lapses and also for absence from duty‑Explanation that lapses were due to inexperience‑Charge of absence proved‑Accused, held, being young in age mistakes committed through inexperience should not mar his future prospects‑Penalty of dismissal altered to that of removal from service.
This is an appeal by Ijaz Ahmad, ex‑Forest Guard, against his dismissal on 6‑4‑1977 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Muzaffargarh Forest Division, Muzaffargarh, on charges of misconduct and absence from duty. His appeal to the Conservator of Forests, Bahawalpur Circle, was rejected on 18‑3‑1978.
2. In the dismissal order, the appellant was charged with (ailing to carry out the duty assigned to him for maintenance of plantation along Sohni Distributory in February, 1977, not preparing the enumeration register of Sohanro Minor and absence from duty without proper leave from 3‑3‑1977. Moreover, a penalty of Rs. 1120, was imposed on him for responsibility in damage to 13 laras of shisham noticed on his beat.
3. The appellant was heard and the record examined. The appellant has pleaded inexperience and ignorance of departmental procedures in respect of his lapses in the performance of his official work. But he has not been able to account for his absence without leave. He was first absent from 24‑9‑1976 to 31‑10‑1976 for which a show‑cause notice was issued to him. Then he absented himself from 3‑3‑1977 and did not turn up for duty till 6‑4‑1977. The appellant is also charged with joining the Police force as a foot constable for 14 days during the first period of his absence.
4. After perusing the record we are satisfied that no unauthorised step was taken in the procedure adopted against the appellant. Oil one count at least that of absence from duty‑the charge is fully proved. In view, however, of the appellant's young age and in order that mistakes committed through inexperience should not mar his future prospects we are inclined to, reduce the punishment which we find to be on the excessive side. The order therefore, is amended to the extent that with effect from 6‑4‑1977 the appellant will stand removed from service.
Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer