EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal has arisen out of the judgment doted 9.1.2017 of the Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi whereby it allowed the appeal filed by the respondent in the terms as under:- "For the foregoing reasons, we hove come to the conclusion that the appellant has not been dealt in accordance with law, therefore, we have no hesitation in accepting the appeal, setting aside the impugned order doted 08.07.2013. Order accordingly. The respondents are directed to reinstate the appellant into service from the date of removal from service. The question of back benefits shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with the instructions contained at Serial No. 155, Vol.II of Estocode 2007, which mode had been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case reported as 2010 SCMR 11."
2. The learned DAG appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that where absence of the petitioner was a writ large on the face of the record and no plausible explanation was offered therefore, his misconduct was proved to the hilt, therefore, he having been found guilty of misconduct was rightly removed from service. He next contended that even if it is assumed that the respondent rendered more than ten years service he could not ask for extraordinary relief for more than three years as of right and that if such interpretation of the rule is allowed to prevail the entire edifice of civil service would collapse like a house of cards. The learned DAG lastly argued that disagreement with the Inquiry Officer in the matrix of the case and absence of reasons therefor cannot be blown out of proportion when unauthorized absence stood proved to the hilt.
3. Learned ASC appearing on behalf of the respondent contended that the respondent asked for extension of extraordinary leave before its expiration; that no decision was taken there and then and that the moment the respondent came to know that he is being proceeded against, he reported his arrival on 7.1.2006; that in the circumstances it cannot be held that he was guilty of misconduct; that the finding of the Inquiry Officer being in line with the admitted facts could not have been brushed aside by the Authority without recording any reason and that the impugned judgment being well reasoned on all essential aspects of the case merits no interference.
4. We have carefully gone through the record and considered the submissions of the learned DAG as well as learned ASC for the respondent.
5. Yes, the respondent at the relevant time rendered ten years service. He as such could avail leave with full pay upto 387 days and extraordinary leave upto five years. But extension could not be taken for granted. Nor could the unauthorized absence be justified on this ground. The respondent without extension of leave could not stay away from his duty even for a day let alone weeks and months. What were the circumstances justifying grant of extraordinary leave for three years and what were the circumstances justifying the extension of extraordinary leave. We have been told that in the first instance respondent went abroad for higher education and then his mother fell ill which called for extension in his extraordinary leave. But the questions whether his mother was suffering from a disease which was incapable of being treated in the country and that if at all it was so, was he alone in the family to attend his mother and bear the scourge have not been answered. It has become routine with the high ranking officers to go abroad on such pretexts and stay there for good without knowing that this country which has spent a great deal on them while holding examination for Civil Superior Service and providing training in the Academy needs their undivided and whole hearted service more than any other entity. Such a casual and even callous attitude towards the civil service tending to worsen it cannot be ignored so lightly. Respondent in the circumstances cannot go unpunished. But at the same time his unblemished service of more than 21 years cannot be allowed to go unrequited. We, therefore, convert this petition into appeal, allow it, set aside the impugned judgment and orders of the authority and convert his removal from service into compulsory retirement. Needless to say the service he rendered even after his reinstatement shall be counted towards his pensionary benefits.