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. 262 of 1982, decided on 6th July; 1983.
‑‑ R. 4 (1) (a) (ii)‑Minor Penalty‑Withholding of increment with cumulative effect‑Not envisaged by rule.
Appellant in person.
Haroon‑ur‑Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondents.
Muhammad Yunis has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, against the order of respondent, dated 14th April, 1982 and 13th March, 1982 of Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, Lahore respectively, by which he was imposed a minor penalty of withholding of three annual increments with cumulative effect.
2. The appeal is still on the preliminary stage but as the matter involved is very short one and the respondents are duly represented before us, therefore, we convert this appeal into a regular one and decide the same on merits.
3. The main charge against the appellant was that‑‑
(i) he accepted Rs. 6 as illegal gratification from Muhammad Saleem to carry the Robkar to Camp Jail. '
(ii) he was instrumental to the illegal detention of Muhammad Amin accused in judicial lock‑up and less cared for the liberty of a man.
However, the Deputy Commissioner came to the conclusion that since no ulterior motive has been proved, therefore, the act is a result of gross negligence only. The appellant was charge‑sheeted and Enquiry Officer was appointed who was a Magistrate 1st Class. Learned Deputy Commissioner imposed minor penalty of withholding of three annual increments with cumulative effect.
4. We do not find any reason to interfere with the well‑considered order of the learned Deputy Commissioner who has already taken a very lenient view of the situation, but we are constrained to observe that under rules withdrawal of increments can only be without cumulative effect' and not with cumulative effect.
5. We have decided this issue in many of our earlier judgments which have attained finality as the same were not appealed against before the Supreme Court of Pakistan Following the law laid down we dismiss the appeal with the observation that the word 'with cumulative effect' be substituted to the word 'without cumulative effect'. With this modification in the impugned order we dispose of the appeal in the terms so mentioned above.
A. E. Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer