SYED ALLY MADAD SHAH (CHAIRMAN).--Dr. Muhammad Younis Noorwala, the appellant, has preferred this appeal against the order of his removal from service as a Medical Officer, Wapda, issued on 11-8-1985 by the General Manager(Admn.), Wapda, Lahore.
2. The appellant was removed from service on account of his absence from duty with effect from 27-8-1984, while he was posted as Incharge Deputy Medical Superintendent, Wapda Hospital, Quetta. He had proceeded on five days casual leave with effect from 22-8-1984. On expiry of leave, he did not join duty and, instead, sent applications, one after the other, for extension of leave on the ground of illness of his wife. He was not granted further leave and he was directed to resume duty, which he did not. Initially, his explanation for absence from duty was called for under letter dated 12-11-1984. He submitted his explanation advancing the ground of illness of his wife. His explanation was not accepted and he was served a show-cause notice dated 9-12-1984. He submitted his reply on 18-12-1984. In the meantime, he was placed under suspension vide office order dated 13-12-1984 and was simultaneously served a charge-sheet dated 13-12-1984. He submitted his explanation reiterating the same grounds of illness of his wife. Inquiry was conducted into the charges. He was served a final show-cause notice dated 2-5-1985. He again submitted his reply stating almost the same grounds of his absence from duty, and, ultimately, he was removed from service under the impugned order dated 11-8-1985. His departmental appeal was dismissed as per letter of intimation dated 29/31-10-1985.
3. The absence of the appellant from duty without sanction is not disputed. The appellant's contention, however, is that his wife was seriously ill and he had, therefore, applied for leave which should not have been refused and he was not liable to have been imposed the punishment of removal from service.
4. The respondents have contested the appeal and contended that the appellant was transferred from Hyderabad and posted as Incharge Deput Medical Superintendent in the hospital at Quetta but he did not join. The learn counsel for the respondent has urged that the appellant just advanced the pre of illness of his wife in order to avoid his transfer from Hyderabad to Quetta, for his personal gain, and he did not join duty after he was called upon to resume duty and even after the initiation of the departmental proceedings against him. According to him, the appellant deserved the punishment imposed on him and he has placed reliance on a decision of this Tribunal in an identical case of Moinuddin Qureshi v. Federation of Pakistan (Appeal No, 101(K)/82, decided on 30-4-1984).
5. The absence of the appellant from duty is not denied. His plea that he had applied for leave on the ground of illness of his wife was not disbelieved by the Inquiry Officer. However, the appellant had to obey the order made for his resuming duty and he made himself liable for departmental action under the Pakistan Wapda Employees (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1978. But he was not liable to have been dealt with so severely as to have been removed from service on account of his absence for a few months on the ground of illness of his wife. The quantum of punishment, therefore, is to be modified. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the impugned order of removal of the appellant from service is modified to the stoppage of his promotion for one year from the day he could be due therefor. He shall be reinstated in service but without monetary benefits for the period he remained out of the job which shall be treated as leave without pay.