JUDGMENT JUSTICE (RTD) ABDUL GHANI SHAIKH (CHAIRMAN).- Appellant Wajid Ali Jakhrani while posted as Incharge Principal Government Higher Secondary School, Kashmore District Jacobabad, committed certain acts of mis-conducts and was, therefore,, served with a charge-sheet dated 7.2.1998 issued by the respondent No.1, containing statement of allegations as under;- "1. You did not credit the tuition fee amounting to Rs. 39,870/-collected by the Class Teachers form Class-VI to Xth in the month of March, 1997 to the National Bank of Pakistan, Kashmore, though this amount was duly received by, you. Thus you apparently have embezzled the amount.
2. Similarly, another amount of Rs. 69,480/- being tuition fees for Class-XIth & XI 1th collected by you was not deposited in the National Bank of Pakistan.
3. That you have tampered with the Challan No. 3 dated 30.9.1996 and challan TMo. 2148 dated 12.11.1996 pertaining to N.B.P. Kashmore and made over-writing embezzling Rs. 300/- of each student by changing the figures/amount in challans.
4. That the amount of Miscellaneous fees i.e. P.T. Development Social welfare, Boys fees, games, and sports, scouts etc has been collected from the students of Class VI to XII but expenditure/utilization cannot be accounted for from the relevant record.
5. That you made the illegal appointments of five JSTs, DT, PTI AW1, Junior Clerk, Lab- Assistant, one against each post, in contravention of rules/Government instructions, which were subsequently cancelled and the concerned staff terminated by your successor.
6. That you embezzled the estimated income of Rs. 40,000/- from 1995-96 and 1996-97 crops of about 8 acres of agriculture land of Government Higher Secondary School, Kashmore.
7. That under the head of liveries, you paid Rs. 60/- to each Peon of your school totaling to Rs. 300/- for five peons against an amount of Rs. 13,600/- drawn by you during two years 1995- 96 and 1996- 97 under the sanctioned budget.
8. That you have embezzled Rs. 45,972/- against the TA/DA bills of staff by preparing false bills in the names of various staff members and also in your own name.
9. That you misappropriated the budget allocation of Rs. 15,000/- for the year 1995-96 and. Rs.
12,000/- for the year 1996-97 against telephone dues without depositing the same in the office of concerned Revenue Officer, telephones, though the concerned telephone bearing No. KOS-857 remained disconnected during the relevant period.
10. That you misappropriated an amount of Rs. 23,000/- allocated against the Head C.O.S. (purchase of science material) against-budget allotment of 1996-97.
11. That you under your own signature issued false/fabricated provisional certificate for S.S.C. Part-ll annual examination 1996 with seat No. 1560 to Muhammad Akbar s/o Fakir Muhammad Maiari, NIC No. 360-70-162382 resident of Bhong Sharif Taluka Sadiqabad . District Rahimyar Khan, for this you interpolated the school General register at No. 5123 showing 1.3.1994 as the date, of admission and received the illegal gratification of Rs. 10,000/- from the concerned person.
12. That despite instructions from competent Authority you failed to handover the charge of the record and funds etc. To your successor."
Prof. Dr. Aurangzeb Shaikh, Director College Education, Sukkur Region, Sukkur was appointed as Inquiry Officer, In his reply, appellant denied the allegations and explained his position. He was served with a final show cause notice dated 10.5.1998 which too he replied and reiterated the stand earlier taken by him. Ultimately, vide order dated 9.12.1998 he was awarded major penalty of Removal from Service. He preferred departmental appeal which was rejected as per letter dated 23.7.2000, which according to appellant was not received by him. He then moved application and vide letter dated 22.8.2000 he was informed that his departmental appeal has already been rejected. Hence, this appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that whole disciplinary proceedings initiated and conducted were in utter disregard of the mandatory provision of law and that no proper opportunity was provided to appellant to rebut the allegations and to prove his innocence. He submitted that appellant was active member of Sindh Professors Subject Specialist Association and Mr. Karim Bux Khuhro the then Director School Education was President of the said Association, In the year, 1995 Mr. Khuhro placed charter of demand before the Government of Sindh and called strike, whereupon he was suspended. After re-instatement in 1997 Mr. Khahro started taking revenge from those who had not supported the charter of demand and strike called by him. He stated that Mr. Khuhro started campaign Against appellant through his supporters, resultantly appellant was made target and later-on punished on baseless & frivolous allegations. Learned counsel contended that Mr.. Abdul Aziz the successor principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Kashmore, in his letter dated 30.2.2002 addressed to District Officer (Education) Secondary & Higher Secondary, Jacobabad, fully exonerated the appellant and stated that no misappropriation was ever committed by appellant. He also submitted that all appointments made by appellant were with the written permission of the Additional Director of Schools Education.
Therefore, there was no illegality or irregularity on the part of appellant He also stated that entire amount of tuition fee etc., has already been deposited by appellant and in support thereof, he produced photo-stat copies of paid challans. While concluding arguments, learned counsel submitted that by extending benefit of doubt appellant may be re-instated in service or for conducting full fledged regular inquiry matter may be remanded.
3. In rebuttal, learned Asstt. A.G. Duly assisted by Mr. Saeed Ahmed, Section Officer^Education Department argued that all the charges leveled against the appellant have been proved and despite sufficient opportunities appellant failed either to rebut the same or to prove his innocence.
She stated that during inquiry proceedings appellant admitted his guilt and executed an undertaking in writing that he will refuna the amount in installments and in view of appellant's own admission, he is not entitled to any leniency. While referring the photo-stat copies of challans produced by appellant's learned counsel, she stated that amount was deposited much after appellant's transfer and commencement of fact finding inquiry, which by itself is sufficient that appellant at first mis-appropriated the same. As regards letter dated 30.2.2002 of Mr. Abdul Aziz, Principal of the said School, learned Astt. A.G. Stated that Mr. Abdul Aziz disowned his signature on the said letter, In these circumstances, she stated that impugned order of penalty being proper and justified calls for no interference and appeal may be dismissed.
4. We have considered the above submissions and with the assistance of learned counsel for parties have also perused the material placed on the record. As per' allegations contained in charge sheet, appellant had misappropriated huge Government money, detailed as under'.
1. Tuition fee of Class VI of Xth 39,870.00
2. Tuition fee of Class Xlth & Xllth 69,480.00
3. Agriculture crop of 8 acres ' 40,000.00
4. Amount of liveries 13,240.00
5. T.A./D.A. Of staff and of himself 45,972.00
6. Telephone bill for 1995-96 & 1966-97 27,000.00
7. Purchase of science material 23,000.00
8. Misc, fee of P.T. Development etc. 196,972.00 455,534.00 {{TABLE}} Besides, he illegally appointed five JSTs, one each Drawing teacher, P.T.I. A.W.1., Junior Clerk and Laboratory Assistant.
5. During the first inquiry conducted by inquiry committee headed by Mr. Allahdad Memon, District Education Officer (Male) Secondary, Jacobabad so also during second inquiry conducted by Mr. Aurangzeb Shaikh, Director College Education, Sukkur, appellant failed to account for the above said amount. He had not produced a single challan, voucher, receipt etc., to show that the amount actually received by him from students and the amount drawn by him from Government Treasury were deposited in Bank or paid to the concerned staff etc. There is no denial from the appellant that amount referred to above was never received by him, therefore, it was his bounden duty to account for the same. Out of total amount of Rs. 1,09,350/- received by him as Tuition fee, he deposited an amount of Rs. 28,035/- in N.B.P. Kashmore which too after his transfer from school in August, 1997. The said amount was deposited in installments from September, 1997 to February, 1998: So far balance amount he has not produced a single challan. Thus the charge of rhis- appropriation of tuition fee stands proved against him. Similarly, he had withdrawn an amount of Rs. 27,000/- as Telephone charges during .1995- 96 and 1996-97 (Rs. 15,000/- and 12,000/-) but he farled to deposit the same in Bank, It has also come on record that during the said years the telephone of School was lying disconnected. Thus the charge of mis-appropriation of telephone charges also stands proved against him. In similar fashion, appellant also mis-appropriated other huge Government money. During inquiry proceedings, he admitted his guilt and as per his undertaking in writing he had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 2,39,350/- and he promised to refund the same in installments. At no stage during pendency of appeal, appellant denied the execution of such undertaking. Admittedly, the said amount has never been paid by him. Like-wise he h^s not alleged any ill-will or animosity against any of the Inquiry officers. The Inquiry Committee headed by Mr. Allahdad Memon, District Education Officer and the Inquiry officer Mr. Aurangzeb Shaikh, Director College Education, Sukkur, as it appears from the inquiry reports submitted by them, conducted the same in perfectly legal and valid meaner. They scrutinized each and every document/register etc. Full, fair, proper and adequate opportunity was afforded to appellant to rebut the charges and to prove his innocence but he failed. Even during the pendency of this appeal, appellant was provided sufficient opportunity and chance to account for the amount referred to above but he failed to avail such opportunity. Therefore, appellant cannot say that no opportunity was provided to him to defend himself and to prove his innocence. Being the Incharge Principal of the School coupled with Drawing & Disbursing Officer it was appellant's responsibility to maintain upto date record of receipt and payment in accordance with settled procedure and policy. He, however, failed to maintain the same and thus committed serious financial illegalities and irregularities, which calls for penal action.
6. As regards letter dated 30.2.2002 of Mr. Abdul Aziz, Principal of the said School addressed to the District Education Officer, Secondary, Jacobabad, it is suffice to say that $1r. Abdul Aziz personally appeared before us and disown his signatures on the said letter, In such a situation, the only inference which can be drawn is that appellant in order to mis-guide and mislead this Tribunal managed the said letter to save his skin from the clutches of law. This in fact is additional ground of appellant's involvement in such financial malpractices, illegalities and irregularities.
7. Apart from above financial illegalities and irregularities, appellant in excess of his powers appointed ten employees of different grades from B-5 to B-9 for which he was not legally competent. His contention that such permission was accorded to him by the Additional Director, may be true, but he was accorded permission to fill the vacant post in accordance with law and the prescribed procedure. Since during those days there was ban on appointment, as such, he was not legally competent to appoint any person. Besides, no codal formalities as provided by law were complied with inasmuch as two of such employees were appointed beyond the sanctioned strength, as per letter dated 10.4.1996 of Mr. Rahan Ali Jakharani, Principal of said School addressed to the Director School Education (Secondary), Larkana Region, Larkana.
8. In view of overwhelming documentary evidence referred to above coupled with appellant's own admission in writing we are of the considered opinion that appellant was rightly awarded major penalty of Removal from Service, which calls for no interference.
9. Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.
10. Announced in open Court.
Given under our hands and seal of the Tribunal, this day of July, 2005.