1. B. G. N. KAZI (MEMBER).----Chaman Muhammad who was serving as Head Clerk in the Office of Public Relations, Tarbela Dam Project in District Hazara was charge-sheeted for misconduct and was also suspended with effect from 15th November 1977. He challenged the order of suspension before this Tribunal on the ground that it was illegal and against the rules. During the pendency of the appeal second show-cause notice dated 16th March 1978 was served upon him and he was dismissed from service with effect from 16th April 1978 vide order of the General Manager and Project Director, Tarbela Dam Project.
2. He preferred an appeal against the dismissal order before the departmental authority on 27th April 1978 but no action was taken by the authority. He then filed the instant appeal on 31st August 1978.
3. The main ground of appeal is, that on the basis of allegation contained in the charge sheet the appellant was dismissed even before in 1976 and the aforesaid order of dismissal was challenged before this Tribunal and was set aside vide order dated 5th September 1977. The appellant was re-- instated and once again has been punished on the same allegation. It is the contention of the appellant that since order of his dismissal was set aside by this Tribunal he cannot be punished on the same charge again and as such action on the part of the authority amounts to contempt of the authority of this Tribunal.
4. Arguments of Mr. M. Sadiq Dar Advocate, for the appellant were heard and he conceded that there is no contravention of the Rules of the West Pakistan WAPDA Employees. (Efficiency and Disciplinary) Rules, 1975 this time but besides the main ground mentioned above it is urged that the charge-sheet dated 19th November 1977 is a belated one since-the action complained against related to September, 1976 and further that depart--mental action was based solely on the testimony of the Chief Engineer (O & M) who was alleged to have caught the appellant red- handed while stealing steel scrap from the workshop on 19th September, 1976.
5. With regard to first contention, a perusal of the order of this Tribunal dated 5th September 1977 would show that it was held that there was no proper compliance with the WAPDA Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 and, therefore, on the aforesaid technical ground the order was set aside without going into the merits of the case. There was, therefore, no violation of the principle of autre fois acquit or contravention of rule of natural justice in maxim, Nemo debet lis vexari pro una et eadem causa. There could be no question of considering that the appellant is being vexed for the same cause twice because all that the Tribunal held was that due to the non-- compliance with the rules, the enquiry proceedings were invalid. Since there was no decision on the merits and this time disciplinary action was taken in accordance with the rules, there could be no question of matter being res judicata.
6. The only other ground of substance which has been urged by the learned counsel is that the enquiry proceedings were based on the evidence of the Chief Engineer. It is not the number of witnesses but the quality of the evidence which is to be appreciated. No mala fides on the part of the Chief Engineer have been alleged and therefore, there was no reason for the Enquiry Officer or the authority to overlook his evidence specially when the Chief Engineer stated that he had caught the appellant red handed while removing steel scrape from the Workshop through Garbage Van.
7. The appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.
8. SHAH ABDUR RASHID (CHAIRMAN).-----I agree.