Find a Lawyer

Case No. 148/119 of 1984, decided on 14th September, 1985.

‑‑‑ Adverse remarks‑‑Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer given remarks (i) "Easy going and sits on important cases due to his lethargy attitude", and (ii) "Takes his responsibilities lightly and resultantly his performance in Entertainment Duty and Education Cess cases in particular was not upto the mark"‑‑Justification in support of remarks (i) simply of general nature without any supporting record but remarks, (ii) supported by Comparative figures‑‑Service Tribunal in circumstances, accepted appeal partly and directing expunction of remarks (i)‑‑Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of.1974), S. 4.

Appellant in person.

Masood Ahmad Ghuman, Deputy District Attorney for Respondents.

.‑‑Wali Muhammad Khatran, Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer, Ahmadpur East has made this appeal to this Tribunal wherein he has impleaded the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 as mentioned above.

2. By virtue of this appeal the appellant has prayed that the adverse remarks for the period from 1‑7‑1981 to 30‑6‑1982 be expunged. It has also been prayed that the impugned order, dated 27‑11‑1983 be set aside.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was conveyed the following adverse remarks for the period from 1‑7‑1981 to 30‑6‑1982:‑

"Easy going and sits on important cases due to his lethargy attitude."

"Takes his responsibilities lightly and resultantly his performance in Entertainment Duty and Education Cess in particular was not upto the mark."

The appellant made an appeal to the Secretary, Excise and Taxation, Punjab, Lahore which was rejected, vide order, dated 27‑11‑1983. Hence this appeal.

4. We have heard the parties i.e., the appellant in person and Mr. Masood Ahmad Ghuman, Deputy District Attorney assisted by the representative of the respondents on behalf of the respondents.

5. It has been argued by the appellant that there is no truth in the adverse remarks conveyed to him. He has worked efficiently, honestly and has achieved targets. There is nothing on record to show that he was easy going and was sitting on important cases, due to his lethargy attitude. As far as achievements are concerned, no doubt there was some shortfall as far as the achievements of taxes in the cases of Entertainment Duty and Education Cess are concerned, but the achievements are to be judged as a whole for all the taxes during the year under report. The recovery position of taxes, during the year under report (1981‑82) had been Rs. 69,05,840 wherein in the previous year (1980‑81) was Rs. 63,97,991. Thus, due to his hard work and efforts, he made more recovery of Rs.5,07,849 then the last year.

He has pointed out that fixation of targets is on an estimation basis and thus there are no hard and fast formulas on the basis of which the achievements could be compared with the targets so fixed. Hence, he has pointed out that the adverse remarks had been given on the basis of some misunderstanding and without applying full mind by the Excise and Taxation Officer, Mianwali/Director, Excise and Taxation, Sargodha.

6. On the other hand the learned Deputy District Attorney has relied on the parawise comments submitted by the respondents and has submitted that the adverse remarks given are fully justified and no exception can be taken against the impugned orders.

7. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments of the parties and have consulted the record of this case very carefully. We have also gone through the justification given by the Excise and Taxation Officer, Mianwali vide his letter, dated 19‑8‑1985 on the representation of the appellant for expunction of adverse remarks. The justification given is of general nature and does not justify the remarks given by him i.e. "Easy going and sits on important cases due to his lethargy attitude". The learned Deputy District Attorney and the representative of the respondents at the time of hearing of the case, also could not put up any other record to justify these adverse remarks.

8. As far as other remarks 'Takes his responsibilities lightly and resultantly his performance in Entertainment Duty and Education Cess in particular was not upto the marks' are concerned the following achievements of the appellant (for the year under report) have been produced by the respondents to which the appellant also agreed:‑

Keeping in view the above facts and data the adverse remarks given above as are mentioned in this pare. are fully justified.

9. The result of the above analysis of the case is that the appeal is partially accepted. The adverse remarks given in the A.C.R. Of the appellant for the period from 1‑7‑1981 to 30‑6‑1982 "Easy going and sits on important cases due to his lethargy attitude," are expunged and the adverse remarks. "Takes his responsibilities lightly and resultantly his performance in Entertainment Duty and Education Cess in particular was not upto the marks" will stand and are sustained as such.

There are no orders as to costs.

A.E.

Appeal partially accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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