Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 281/P of 1984, decided on 19th October, 1985.
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Civil service‑‑Dismissal‑‑Petitioner held to be guilty of misappropriation of tax amount collected by him on behalf of Government which was sought to be recovered from him‑‑Leave refused.
S. Safdar Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 19th October, 1985.
‑Facts of this case briefly stated are that on 13‑11‑1972 when petitioner was posted as Forest Guard in Forest Department at Bannu Miranshah Check post, he made report to his superior Officers that sum of Rs.19,619.25 collected by him as tax duty on the timber‑transport was stolen from him. The matter was referred to the police, and finally petitioner's version was not accepted and a departmental enquiry was also initiated against him. He was found guilty and was dismissed from service and the aforesaid amount was ordered to be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue. Petitioner challenged this order in appeal to the Conservator of Forests who by the order dated 12‑6‑1974 held that instead of Rs.19,619.25, sum of Rs.9,809.62 should be recovered from him, and remaining portion be recovered from petitioner's companions. Petitioner then filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, D.I. Khan, against the order of recovery of the aforesaid amount from him which was dismissed on 31‑10‑1978. On appeal; however, learned District Judge D.I. Khan reversed the judgment of the trial Judge and decreed the suit in plaintiff's favour on the ground that the amount in question not being money payable to the Government under the Forest Act or under any rule made there under could not be recovered as land revenue. However later, in a revision at respondent's instance, learned Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court set aside the judgment of the learned District Judge as he held that the amount in question having been realised by petitioner as tax duty on the transport of timber, it was recoverable as arrears of land revenue under the provisions of section 82 of the Forest Act. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner filed this petition so as to seek leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court. "
We are not inclined to exercise discretionary jurisdiction of this Court even if it may be available to petitioner as he has been held to be guilty of misappropriation of tax‑amount collected by him on behalf of the Government which is now sought to be recorded from him. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
M.Y.H Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer