Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

ALLAH DITTA versus DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER FOREST DIVISION, LAHORE


Appeal Inquiry Officer dismissing Section D against Appellant (Forrester) for alleged damages to the trees, apologized to them but reported the loss to top officials in Appellant's Appellant. In the case of the appellant, it cannot be denied in support of a failure to give. Damage Retention Order Retained

1980 P L C (C. S.) 241

[Service Tribunal Punjab]

Present: M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman, Mazhar Munir and S. Hafeezur Rehman,

Members

ALLAH DITTA

Versus

DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER FOREST DIVISION, LAHORE

Appeal No. 7/60 of 1977, decided on 24th September, 1979.

Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)

----S. 4‑Dismissal‑Appeal against‑Appellant (Forester) charged for loss on trees‑Enquiry Officer exonerating him of charge but finding him guilty of inefficiency‑Record supporting failure of reporting loss to superior authorities on part of appellant‑Appellant, in circum stances, held, cannot be absolved of loss‑Dismissal order upheld.

JUDGMENT

M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).‑--

Allah Ditta, appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 29‑8‑76 passed by D. F. O. Forest Division. Changa Manga dismissing him on the ground of inefficiency. His appeal before the Chief Conservator of Forests was rejected on 24‑11‑76.

2. The facts of the case are that a complaint was received by the D. F. O. who himself inspected the cite and a charge‑sheet was issued to the appellant. The appellant submitted his report on 3‑1‑77. The Enquiry Officer exone rated the appellant of all the charges but found him guilty of inefficiency.

3. The parties have been heard. The main contention of the appellant is that one Mr. Ashraf, Forestor is only responsible for the loss of trees. We are not convinced by this argument. It was the duty of the appellant to inform his superiors of the factual position, even if the trees were cut and taken away by some other Department of the Government. In view of this, the appellant cannot be absolved of the loss of trees and for not reporting the fact to his superiors. His appeal is therefore, dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
best advocate from Leepa lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.