1. MR. JUSTICE SHAH ABDUR RASHID (CHAIRMAN).-A letter has been received and placed on the file from the respondent (Directorate General of Registration), wherein it .Has been stated that Mr. Inayatullah Bajwa, appellant has been re-instated in service and his appeal has become infruc-- tuous. This re-instatement is unconditional as nothing has been stated therein as to why the order of re-instatement has been passed. Mr. Habib Suwar Tariq however, says that there is a criminal case pending against the appellant and in connection therewith he is under suspension and shall continue to remain under suspension till the case is decided or decision is taken to re-instate him.
2. This is quite a different matter. If the appellant is found guilty by the Court, that would give a fresh cause of action to the respondent to proceed against the appellant but in case, on the previous charge, the appellant is departmentally proceeded against, then this will amount to fraud with this Tribunal and the order would be illegal, as n one can be vexed twice for the same cause. This appeal has become infructuous and the appellant has been re-instated. ..However, if the appellant is convicted by the Court then action can be taken against him on the conviction and not otherwise. As regards suspension, the appellant can seek separate remedy. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.