Tauqeer Ahmed Khan, Member. Through this appeal under section-4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, imposition of major penalty of dismissal from service has been challenged by the appellant, having been passed/issued on 21.5.2022. The departmental appeal dated 13.6.2020 was replied by the respondents vide letter dated 23.6.2020 directing to submit the same through correct channel i.e. Head of office. The appellant again preferred departmental appeal on 09.9.2020 to proper, authority but the same remained un-responded.
2. Facts in brief are that a charge sheet dated 09.01.2020 was issued to him alongwith the statement of allegations containing following allegations: "A. HQ COMLOG Letter PN?HQ COMLOG/03/407068 dated 31 Dec 19.
Mr. Akbar Ali (P. No. 08725) HSM of P&I Electronics Workshop (C.No. 323) has (a). It has been learnt that you are a drug addict and consume hashish (chars). (b). You were involved in criminal activities. This, on the part of above named individual, amounts to misconduct in terms of "Rules Relating to Workmen of PN Dockyard and other PN Establishments 1965".
The appellant was directed to submit his reply to the above statement of allegations within 07 days. It has been stated that while the appellant went to submit his reply to the said charge sheet, it was informed that the same has been withdrawn/cancelled and a fresh charge sheet would be issued to him. Fresh charge sheet dated 28.6.2020 alongwith statement was then issued to him with the following added allegations: "A. HQ COMLOG Letter PN?HQ COMLOG/03/407068 dated 31 Dec 19.
Mr. Akbar Ali (P. No. 08725) HSM of P&I Electronics Workshop (C.No. 323) has (a). Involved in taking drugs i.e. hashish (chars). (b). You were involved in criminal activities. This, on the part of above named individual, amounts to misconduct in terms of "Rules Relating to Workmen of PN Dockyard and other PN Establishments 1965".
It was stated that the fresh charge sheet was issued with malafide intentions by the respondents who wanted to involve the appellant in such particular case. Proper and detailed reply dated 28.01.2020 was submitted, denying the allegations and explaining his position. The same was not considered by the respondents and a final show cause notice was issued to the appellant, instead of supplying copy of inquiry report, threats were exerted. The authority while issuing show cause notice, posing himself to be the appellate authority as appellant was directed to submit his representation before the said authority against the proposed punishment. This goes to show that the Authority was pre-empting itself to be the appellate authority as well. Which is not the spirit of law. The mindset of the department can be seen from the fact that the department were bent upon to impose major penalty upon the appellant without holding regular inquiry as report of the inquiry has not been supplied, thus caused serious prejudice to the appellant. The appellant submitted his detailed reply to the show cause notice, as directed alongwith necessary documents relating to license. Impugned order dated 21.5.2020 was, thereafter, issued, without holding regular inquiry, without supplying copy of inquiry report and without affording chance of personal hearing.
The appellant submitted a departmental appeal, which was returned for submission before the proper thrum. While complying with the directions, appeal was submitted, but the same remained un-responded.
3. In their comments, legal objections were raised by the respondents that no appeal was filed as the appellant has approached this Tribunal without exhausting the available forum; that the appeal is hopelessly time barred. On merits, it was stated that the second charge on charge, sheet was not clear as to illegal activity of appellant, therefore, it was cancelled, thereafter, he was issued charge sheet. In fact, upon involvement of criminal activities, the appellant was issued a charge sheet. An inquiry was also held wherein he appeared before the inquiry committee and confessed that he is involved in consuming/using hashish and obtained fake Arms License illegally. The final show cause notice was issued by the Authority for providing an opportunity to the appellant before award of punishment as per procedure in vogue. Appellant was afforded the opportunity of personal hearing wherein he admitted that he is consuming charas and obtaining of fake Arms License illegally and without following proper procedure. All the legal procedure for disciplinary action against the appellant was followed as per law in true letter and spirit; individual was also called for personal hearing. It was stated that appeal was returned with direction to submit through correct channel i.e. Head of office in which appellant was lastly employed. Since then, the appellant did not submit any appeal. Annex-D to instant appeal is concocted and fabricated, the same has not been received till date for adjudication.
4. Arguments heard and record perused.
5. The first legal objection of the respondents, in our view, is uncalled for and not tenable in law as the submission of departmental appeal was admitted by them, but it was allegedly not submitted to the proper forum. In para-8 of comments, they themselves have admitted submission of appeal by the appellant, but it was returned with direction to submit through correct channel. The reason for our conclusion that the objection is not tenable in law is that when the department itself had admitted submission of appeal by the appellant, then it was their duty to have forwarded the same to the proper authority, instead of returning the same to the appellant for its submission to the proper authority. We are fortified in our view by the Judgments reported in 2005 PLC (CS) 1042 and 1984 PLC (CS) 485. The second legal objection in our view is also of no help to the respondents and thus discarded.
6. The respondents alongwith their comments have filed inquiry report and letter dated 28.2.2020 for constitution of inquiry committee. Findings of the said committee dated 28.2.2020 would show that charges against the appellant was duly proved through a regular inquiry. Recommendations of the committee is also available on record, which concluded that, "After thorough scrutiny during the course of inquiry and information shared by NI. Inquiry Committee recommends that Mr. Akbar Ali (P No. 08725) HSM may be dismissed from service". Statements of Lt. Muhammad Ali, Sultan Zaib, Muhammad Shoaib Javed and that of the appellant was also recorded, which have also been filed alongwith the comments. Statement of appellant has been perused by us, which also bears his signatures and the same has been counter-signed by President of Inquiry Committee. The statement is reproduced as under: "I, Akbar Ali s/o Mera Ali state that I am serving in Pakistan Navy at PN Dockyard, ICE & Cont Department/C. No. 323 since January 2017. I have been called by the Inquiry Committee on 17 February 2020. I admit that I have consumed "CHARS" occasionally with my friends who are CHARS addicted and I also know the places/sellers from where CHARS can be purchased. I admit that I have purchased NOKIA-106 mobile from shopkeeper in our area. I don't know about whether it was snatched or robbed and I have never checked this mobile from CPLC. I admit that I handed over may pistol to Mr. Rahim Shah s/o Shad Muhammad for his brother's marriage upon insisting. I was unaware of his intentions. Later on, Mr. Rahim shah s/o Shad Muhammad was apprehended by Rangers.
I admit that I got Arms license in October 2018 for the first time through an agent Jadoon and Company at Lucky Star, Saddar Karachi. I state that I was unaware about its issuance in back dates. I have registered my Pistol in Momin Abad Police Station and 32 Wing Sindh Rangers in our vicinity.
Sd/ AKBAR ALI SHAH (P NO 08725)
ICE & Cont. department/C.No. 323 Dated 17 February 2020 We have also perused record submitted by the department alongwith their comments and find that a proper and regular inquiry was conducted against the appellant, where he admitted his guilt, therefore, it cannot be said that no inquiry was conducted. He was also afforded chance of personal hearing, as per the certificate placed on record alongwith the comments. The same bears signature of the appellant. No rejoinder to the comments have been filed by the appellant.
7. In view of what has been discussed above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order has been passed against the appellant after thorough and proper/regular inquiry, where he confessed his guilt, as such, the same does not warrant interference by this Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
8. No order as to costs. Parties be informed accordingly.