MALIK ZAWWAR HUSSAIN (MEMBER). -Muhammad Jameel Khan Assistant Director, Horticulture has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 and has impleaded Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab and Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Department as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the order dated 21-12-1981 be set aside and the adverse remarks conveyed to him vide letter dated 4-6-1980 be expunged.
3. Brief facts of the case are that during the period from 31-8-1979 to 31-12-1979 when the appellant was serving as Parks Manager, Ravi National Park at Lahore, his work and conduct remained under observation by the Reporting Officer as well as by the Chief Conservator of Forests. The Chief Conservator of Forests gave adverse remarks to the, appellant for this period which were conveyed to him vide letter dated 4-6-1980. These remarks are reproduced hereunder for the sake of convenience :- "Has poor reputation of Integrity."
The representation to the Government was rejected vide order - dated 21-12-1981: Hence this appeal.
4. It has been argued by the appellant that, the remarks recorded against him are fake in and have not been substantiated by the Reporting Officer. It has also been submitted that even in the parawise comments furnished by the respondents have not been able to furnish any cogent eason or justification of those remarks. On the other hand the learned District Attorney has submitted that the A. C. R. Is the subjective assessm ent of the work and conduct of a civil servant by his superiors and no objective view can be taken about it. He has also submit--ted that there is were difference between a person being corrupt and a person having a reputation of being corrupt. Since in the report, it is not alleged that he was corrupt and it is only stated that be has poor reputa--tion of integrity, so it is not necessary to prove these remarks, which are the effect of the subjective assessm ent of the work and conduct of the appellant.
5. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments of the parties and have also gone through the record. We have gone through the comments of Mr. Hassan Ali Qureshi, the then Chief Conservator of Forests who was the countersigning officer in this case furnished by him on the representation of the appellant for expunction of adverse remarks. In his comments the Reporting Officer has stated that there were complaints against the integrity of the appellant which might be available in the office of the Chief Conservator of Forests or the Administrative department. He did not quote any specific instance in this behalf nor did he produce any complaints alongwith his comments to the Government. We called upon the representative of the respondents to produce such complaints referred to by the Reporting Officer but he failed to produce them before us despite numerous opportunities. According to instructions contained in para. 30 of booklet entitled "Instructions about Annual Confidential Reports" published by the S&GA Department (Regulation Wing), it is emphasized that the Reporting Officer should be in a position to justify his views if called upon to do so. This para. Is reproduced hereunder for sake of ready reference :- "The opinion expressed should be the result of careful consideration ; no personal bias, or favouritism should colour the report.. The Reporting Officer should be in a position, to justify his views, if called upon to do so."
6. In view of this instruction contained in para. 30 which has the force of rules, we hold that the Reporting Officer has not been able to justify his views contained in the A. C. R. Of the appellant. It Will not be out of place if we reproduce para 5. Of parawise comments furnished by the Chief Conservator of Forests :- "He was posted as Parks Manager, Ravi National Park at Lahore with effect from 31-8-1979. The Chief Conservator of Forests, being stationed at Lahore had at various occasions visited Ravi National Park and must have kept a close watch over his work. There were several complaints about him which the appellant has also admitted in appeal addressed to Secretary, Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Depart--ment. The then Chief Conservator of Forests (countersigning officer) had also reported that his past performance prior to 31-8-1979 was also not above board. He, therefore, recorded such remarks in his annual confidential report for the said period."
7. The perusal of this para. Leads us to arrive at a conclusion that even the Government is not positive about keeping a close watch, over the work of the appellant. We have also gone through the representation of the appellant submitted by him to the Government and we have failed to find any admission on the part of the appellant about any complaints against him. Although in paras. 1 to 3 of comments of the respondents, it has been tried to show that the service record of the appellant has remained chequered yet we feel that these are of no avail to the respondents : because this appeal only relates to the period between 31-8-1979 to 31-12-1979.
8. In view of this analysis we hold that the respondents have not been able to justify the adverse remarks communicated to the appellant which are liable to be expunged so we accept the appeal; set aside the impugned order and direct that the adverse remarks recorded in the character roll of the appellant during the period from 31-8-1979 to 31-12-1979 be expunged There will be no order as to costs.