1. MALIK MUHAMMAD PARVEZ (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant feeling dissatisfied with the impugned orders dated 30-4-1986 and 15-1-1987 passed by respondents Nos.1 and 2 has moved this Tribunal through the present appeal for setting aside the said orders and his re-instatement in service with back benefits. According to him he was appointed in the Education Department as Assistant Workshop Instructor on 25-11-1979 and was posted at Government High School Zarobi, Tehsil Swabi, District Mardan. On account of some differences between him and respondent No.5, a false case was got registered on 7-6-1983 at Police Station, Topi against the appellant under section 506/34, PPC vide FIR No.150 and he was also to face the departmental enquiry on the said charges as well as his involvement with a 6th class student namely Khalid Usman for spending an hour with him in the class room, when the morning assembly was in progress. However, he was, later on acquitted of the criminal case but without affording an opportunity to take part in the enquiry, he was dismissed from service on 21-1-1987, despite his request in response to the final show-cause notice for personal hearing. His appeal to the authority met failure and the present appeal on the ground that the impugned orders are against law, facts and record, that he was acquitted of the charges vide order dated 5-7-86 of the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge; Mardan at Swabi, that Khalid Usman with whom the appellant was bad-named never participated in the enquiry against him, that he was not given the chance of personal hearing and that he has got good service record.
2. Application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for the condonation of delay, if any was also made by him.
3. Respondents submitted written replies denying the allegations levelled by the appellant and finally the arguments were advanced by the parties and record perused. In the light of it the appeal is disposed of as under: Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appeal is within time as the appellant waited for the result of the departmental appeal and then filed the same in the Tribunal. He relied on section 4 of the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal Act of 1974 and 1982 Supreme Court Monthly Review pages 582 and
586. Further he argued that per provisions of section 5 subsection (I) of the N.-W.F.P. Government Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973 the Authorised Officer was bound to obtain approval, if the suspension period was for more than 3 months, but in the instant case the appellant was suspended on 7-6-1983 and finally dismissed on 30-4-1986. According to him this was fatal to the case. No preliminary show-cause notice was served upon the appellant. No opportunity of cross--- examining the witnesses was given to him. Khalid Usman the class 6th student was not produced as a witness against him in the enquiry. Evidence was not recorded on oath. He relied on 1982 PLC (C . S . ) 350. The appellant was acquitted by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Swabi.
4. On the other hand, Special Government Pleader representing the respondents argued that suspension order was approved by respondent No.2 on 7-12-1983. Appellant was served with charge-sheet on 8-1-1984. Proper procedure was adopted by the respondents and no illegality was committed by them in conducting the enquiry. We have gone through the record of the case with their assistance. In the instant case no preliminary show-cause notice was served upon the appellant. Enquiry was conducted on his back. No witness was examined on oath which was obligatory as Enquiry Officer/Enquiry Committee has to perform the quasi-judicial functions and before proceedings he must comply with the legal procedure. It must be in the mind of a witness that if he would tell a lie he would invite curse of Almighty God if he gives false statement. No doubt the social and moral values have been deteriorated to a large extent, yet the Tribunal or the Enquiry Officer is legally bound to perform his part of the duty. Furthermore the departmental enquiry mostly rested on his alleged involvement during the school hours with a class 6th student, but the broad fact remain there that the Enquiry Office did not bother to record the statement of the student. He is a star witness and was present when his class-mates came back after attending the morning assembly. If respondent No.5 apprehended some indecent act with the said student, he was legally bound to bring the matte to the notice of the local police. Withholding of such evidence would mean nothing, but only this, that the charge against the appellant was not well founded. Procedure to conduct the enquiry is giver under sections 5 and 6 of the N.-W.F.P.
5. Government Servant (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973. If any violation of the said procedure is made, then the enquiry cannot be deemed to be legal and proper. In the instant case approval by the competent authority was not obtained by the Enquiry Officer. Director Education was no the authority but the Appellate Forum in the case of the appellant, Divisional Director of Education was the authority. Further it was only obtained for a single period and not after every 3 months. From the above discussion we have come to the conclusion that the appeal must succeed and it is, accordingly, accepted, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Appellant is re-instated in service with all back benefits, from the date of his dismissal. Parties be informed accordingly and the file be consigned to the Record Room.
6. S.Q./57/Sr.N 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.