' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- By this judgment we propose to decide the titled civil petitions involving identical questions of law and facts.
2. The petitioners in Civil Petitions Nos.3526-L, 3540-L of 2002 and 3580-L of 2002 along with cashier were proceeded against regarding fraudulent withdrawal of certain G.P. Fund advances on the bills bearing their signatures. The Inquiry Officer was of the opinion that though negligence on the part of these petitioners in connection with withdrawal of G.P. Fund advance was proved but they were not party to the fraud for which cashier was responsible. The departmental authority imposed penalty of dismissal from service on Shahid Pervaiz, Ch. Abdul Razzaq and penalty of reduction in time scale by three stages on Muhammad Amjad Aleem petitioner in addition to that, penalty of recovery of specified amounts from them was also imposed.
3. Feeling aggrieved, these petitioners filed appeals before the Service Tribunal which have been decided through the impugned judgment, dated 12-9-2002. The penalties of dismissal from service imposed on Shahid Pervaiz and Ch. Abdul Razzaq petitioners have been modified in the manner that their order of dismissal from service was set aside and penalty of recovery of specified amount maintained by finding that they were not parties to the fraud but were negligent whereas penalty of Muhammad Amjad Aleem was modified to the extent that the same was converted into reduction in time scale by one stage as a consequence thereof, Shahid Pervaiz and Ch. Abdul Razzaq petitioners were ordered to be reinstated and period of intervening to be treated as leave of the kind to be due.
4. These petitioners have challenged the said judgment. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the petitioners were held to be not party to the fraud and it was only the Cashier who was wholly responsible who had also found to have caused financial loss to the State and the beneficiary of withdrawal of the G.P. Fund advances, therefore, the penalty of recovery of specific amounts from the petitioners namely, Shahid Pervaiz and Abdul Razzaq was not justified in law as the same is inconsistent with the findings whereas petitioner Muhammad Amjad Aleem has also challenged the imposition of penalty to reduction in time scale by one stage. It was also contended that the penalties imposed on them through modification also do not commensurate with the finding of merely negligence though they were not even negligent, for the Cashier admitted that he was wholly responsible.
5. The Provincial Government has filed Civil Petitions Nos.3376-L, 3377-L and 3378-L of 2002 seeking grant of leave to appeal to challenge the same judgment.
6. It was contended on behalf of the petitioners by the learned counsel, Mr. Muhammad Sharif Butt, Advocate Supreme Court that the penalties imposed by the departmental authority were justified.
7. Leave is granted in all these petitions to further examine the entire case.
8. During the pendency of the appeals recovery of the amounts from the appellants in Civil Petitions Nos.3526-L, 3540-L and 3580-L of 2002 shall remain stayed. These appellants in compliance with the judgment of the Service Tribunal impugned in these petitions shall in the meantime be reinstated and allowed to perform their duties against the posts who shall also be paid their salaries etc. Admissible to them.
9. Since it is a service matter, therefore, hearing of these appeals shall be expedited for which order from Honourable Chief Justice shall be obtained.