' Justice Shahid Waheed, Member.--This appeal under Section 5 of The Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act, 1999 has arisen from the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the appellant, Muhammad Anayet Gondal, under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline)
Rules, 1999 which culminated in the impugned Notification dated 28.05.2012 whereby major penalty of dismissal from service was imposed upon the appellant.
2. In the case on hands, the appellant, while working as Civil Judge at District Toba Tek Singh was charged with following misconduct vide charge-sheet dated 16.6.2011.
1. That while posted as Civil Judge, Toba Tek Singh, you accused during the course of hearing of case titled "Sagheer Ahmad vs. Abdul. Razzaq" passed orders contrary to the law and facts being motivated by some unlawful personal gain or due to religious belief and thus committed misconduct within the meaning of Rule 3(b) punishable under Rule 4(i)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 19.99.
2. That you maintained Bank Account No. 02001487 in Alflah Bank, Toba Tek Singh wherein you deposited Rs. 10,000/- on 27th October, 2009, Rs. 23000/- on 3rd November, 2009, Rs. 50,000/- on 5th December, 2009, Rs.40,000/- on 17th December, 2009, Rs.32,000/- on 4th January, 2010, Rs.8,90,000/- on 13th February, 2010, Rs.7,000/- on 18th February, 2010, Rs.25,000/- on 1st March, 2010, Rs. 1,39,550/- on 8th March, 2010, Rs.25,000/- on 24th May, 2010 and Rs.50,000/- on 14th June, 2010 in cash for which you could not plausibly explained the source of income and the source of deposit and thus you indulged yourself in corruption and lived beyond' your known means of income within the meaning of Rule (3)(c)(i) punishable under Rule 4(i)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999.
3. That during your posting as Civil Judge, Toba Tek Singh, you discharged your judicial function irresponsibly and against settled principle of law by declining bails and also by granting bails and thus you exercised your judicial power ostensibly for illegal personal gain and committed corruption which is punishable under Rule 3(c) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999.
4. That you also engaged yourself in the business of Stock Exchange during your active judicial service which is not permissible under the law and thus you committed misconduct which is punishable under Rule 4(1)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999.
5 That you sold your car bearing Registration No. NV-895 Islamabad and purchased a new car bearing Registration No. LEB 10/5314 beyond the value of your earlier car without obtaining prior permission from the Hon'ble Lahore High Court, Lahore and thus you committed misconduct which is punishable under Rule 4(1)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999.
6. That you obtained loan from National Bank of Pakistan, Ghalla Mandi Branch, Gojra and also obtained loan of Rs. 1,40,000/- on credit card No. 4862-5100-0000-9099 of Bank Allah without prior permission of the Hon'ble Lahore High Court, Lahore and thus you committed misconduct punishable under Rule 4(1)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999.
7. That you developed relations with the litigants of a declaratory suit titled "Azim Saleem vs. Province of Punjab, etc." and on the basis of your personal contacts made decision in favour of Azim Saleem plaintiff and thus you committed misconduct which is punishable under Rule 4(1)(b) of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999."
' The appellant on 24.6.2011 submitted reply to the said charge-sheet and denied the allegations.
The Inquiry Officer, Malik Falak Sher, District & Sessions Judge, Okara in his report dated 28.11.2011 found the appellant guilty of misconduct and proposed that he be awarded major penalty of reduction to a lower pay scale. The disciplinary authority, viz., the Administrative Committee, Lahore High Court, Lahore, disagreeing with the proposed punishment, issued show-cause notice dated 10.3.2012 to the appellant to explain as to why major penalty of dismissal from service be not imposed upon him. After affording opportunity of hearing to the appellant, the Authority imposed upon him major penalty of dismissal from service vide impugned Notification dated 24.5.2012.
Feeling aggrieved, the appellant through a petition under Rule 18 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1999 sought review of the Notification dated 24.5.2012. This review was not responded and, therefore, after lapse of.90 days the appellant filed the instant appeal before this Tribunal.
3. For the order to be proposed in this appeal we are not touching merits of the case. During the course of arguments, the appellant pleaded that reasonable time for submitting reply to the final show-cause notice dated 10.3.2012, that is, a notice for enhancement of punishment, was not given to him. He submitted that he received the said show-cause notice on 14.3.2012 and at that time he was discharging his duties as Civil Judge Class-I, at Darya Khan; that he filed an application dated 14.3.2012 before the Registrar, Lahore High Court, Lahore with a request that he be allowed to peruse/consult the record of inquiry proceedings and for provision of necessary documents for submitting proper reply to the notice; and, that neither the documents were supplied to him nor reasonable time for filing reply to the show-cause notice was granted and, therefore, the hearing afforded to him on 16.3.2012 was feigned. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has resisted the contentions canvassed by the appellant. He submitted that the appellant was in possession of the requisite documents; and, had a reasonable time to file reply to the show-cause notice but he did not avail the opportunity and thus at this stage he cannot be allowed to plead the said ground. The arguments advanced by the respondent's counsel are not persuasive. It is settled principle of law that natural justice in relations to disciplinary proceedings means observance of procedural fairness before holding an officer guilty of misconduct. Depriving the delinquent officer of the Fet opportunity of taking inspection of all documents or non-granting of reasonable time for filing reply to the show-cause notice amounts to violation of principle of natural justice and also of a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 10-A of The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 which contemplates fair trial for determination of the rights of the partias. In the instant case, perusal of record evinces that procedural fairness was not observed as reasonable time for submitting reply to the show-cause notice dated 10.3.2012 was not given to the appellant and, therefore, the impugned Notification dated 24.5.2012 is not sustainable in the eye of law.
4. In the sequel, while setting aside the impugned Notification dated 24.5.2012, this appeal is accepted and the Registrar of the Lahore High Court, Lahore is directed to place the matter before the Authority for granting reasonable time to the appellant for submitting reply to the final show- cause notice dated 10.3.2012 and thereafter to take further steps as per relevant rules.