JUSTICE (RTD). MUNAWARALI KHAN (CHAIRMAN).- This case arose as far back as 3rd January, 1983 when, as a result of departmental, enquiry, the services of the appellant Mansoor Raza Zaidi, holding the post of Chief Inspector of Boilers, were terminated. The appellant's ouster from service was based on the charge that for the purpose of securing employment in the Directorate of Industries, he produced a false certificate of First Class Competency purported to have been conferred by Boilers Branch, Alberta, Canada, which on verification from the said authority turned out to be only a Third Class Competency Certificate. After the Enquiry Officer (Mr. GA.H. Khan Deputy Director, Industries submitted his report, the appellant was issued final show-cause notice and was also personally heard. In the basis of the findings of the Enquiry Officer he was ultimately awarded the penalty referred to above. The appellant lost no the in questioning the correctness of the order of his termination of services in departmental appeal filed on 9.1.1983. Surprising it was after lapse of over seven years that he was intimated vide Industries and Mineral development Department's letter dated 3rd June 1990 that his appeal had been rejected by the Chief Secretary.
Within 30 days of such intimation he approached this tribunal with prayer that the orders of his removal from service be set aside.
2. We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and went through all the relevant document with meticulous care.
3. The statement of allegations which formed the basis of the departmental enquiry against the appellant and his ultimate dispensation of services is reproduced as under:
1. While seeking employment in the Directorate of Industries, Mr. Mansoor Raza Zaidi submitted photostat copy of a Certificate with his application dated 11.2.1976 claiming it to be 'First' Class Competency Certificate's from Canada. His application dated 13.2.1976 also gives out that the certificate in question (which was a photostat copy) was submitted alongwith his application dated 11.2.1976. Thus the certificate in original was never submitted.
2. He claimed in his statement dated 15.1.1980 to have submitted the first class certificate to the Industries Department on 13.2.1976 (in original). Similarly he also informed the Sind Public Service Commission about the submission of the original Certificate to the Industries Department at the the of appointment.
3. The correspondence exchanged with the concerned authorities in Canada to ascertain the genuineness of the First Class Engineers Certificate No.2036 has revealed that:- a) He is not the holder of a First Class but Third Class Engineer's Certificate No.2036 from Alberta Canada, and b) The 'First Class Certificate' produced by him is forged by tampering with the Third Class Certificate actually received by him.
4. Consequently the First Class Competency Certificate No. BAF/Ist/Ex/I/78, dated 13th May, 1978 obtained by him from the Board of Examination Engineers/Attendants, Government of Sind, in exchange of Certificate No.2036 is also rendered invalid. Thus he did not fulfil one of the qualifications prescribed for the post of Boiler Inspector."
It is clear from the allegations contained in the above statement that while seeking employment in the Directorate of Industries, the appellant had produced photo copy of the certificate purported to have been issued by the Canadian Authorities, which was actually Third Class Competency Certificate, but by tampering with the same, it was made to appear as First Class Competency Certificate and as such the appellant was not eligible for the appointment he got as he did not possess one essential qualification of "First Class Competency". The learned counsel for the appellant vehemently denied the allegations of tampering. He ako denied that he had ever produced the First Class Competency Certificate. According to him it was the same hidden hand on whose application enquiry was initiated against the appellant, had played trickery with the appellant and produced or forged First Class Competency Certificate on his behalf obviously with a view to harm his interests. The learned counsel went further to say that the appellant had no reason to indulge in such an ugly at of tampering as the Third Class Competency Certificate that he had acquired and had produced in support of his eligibility was declared superior to the prescribed qualifications. Such declaration emanated, the learned counsel continued, front no. Less an authority than the Provincial Board of Technical Education. As regards the opinion obtained from Punjab Board of Examiners, his contention was that it was clear from the Communication dated 27th July 1981 of the Chairman of the Board of Examining Engineers of Punjab, addressed to Mr. Ghulam Kadir Junejo, Section Officer, Industries, Mineral Development Transport, Excise and Taxation Department, that it did not contain the opinion of the relevant Board of the Punjab Province. In reply to the above arguments the learned Govt, counsel more or less confined himself to the material contained in the written statement and developed his arguments on that basis.
4. It may be stated at the outset that the appellant was also prosecuted in the Court of Special Judge Anticorruption on the same charge of producing forged document for obtaining employment in the Industries Department of Sind Government, which formed the basis for the departmental enquiry against him. However the appellant was acquitted of the said charge vide judgment of Special Judge Anticorruption (Provincial), Karachi dated 4.7.1989. The operative part of the said judgment reads as under: "In view of what I have said above I have found that prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the accused and, therefore, I held the accused not guilty of the charges and in the result I acquit the accused."
5. Whatever be the effect of the above findings on this case, we do not think it worth while to go into the detailed discussion on the point if the certificate in question was forged one. This is particularly so because the appellant himself does not dispute the shaddy status of the certificate. All that he has pleaded is that he had absolutely no intention to produce the forged certificate in support of his qualifications. In other words he had chosen not to reply upon the said certificate as a document for the purpose of securing him the intended job. Instead he claims to have produced Third Class Competency Certificate from Alberta, Canada which, according to him, has been declared by the Sind Board of Technical Education Reflecting qualifications superior to those prescribed for the job in question. Even otherwise apart from the judgment of the Special Judge Anticorruption delivered in favour of the appellant, the material available on record was not enough to prove that the appellant had deliberately produced the certificate in question intending thereby to dupe the authorities about his qualifications.
6. Accordingly we may now proceed to determine if the appellant could sustain his appointment as Inspector of Boilers (Acting Chief Inspector) on the strength of the Third Class Competency Certificate, awarded to him by Alberta Canada. To begin with he was appointed as Inspector of Boilers (Grade-16) on adhoc basis vide Industries Department's notification dated 8th May, 1976. By subsequent notification dated 9th Oct. 1977, of the same department he was allowed to hold the charge of Chief Inspector of Boilers on his own pay and grade. The appellant's services as Inspector of Boilers were regularized by Industries Department's notification dated 7th October, 1978.
However, he was not considered suitable by the Public Service Commission for appointment of Chief Inspector of Boilers. Reverting to his initial appointment as Chief Inspector of Boilers, it was admittedly made in a accordance with the West Pakistan Industrial Service (Class II) Rules 1962, hereinafter referred as 1962-rules. As mentioned at S. No:6 of the Appendix 'A' of these rules, the post of Inspector of Boilers was to be filled by initial recruitment on recommendations of the Public Service Commission from amongst the candidates possessing (i) Diploma in Mechanical or Electrical Engineering from a recognized Institute, (ii) First Class Engineer's Competency Certificate under the Boilers Act 1923 and (iii) Three years's practical experience in repair and maintenance of Steam Boiler. As pointed out above the appellant's appointment as Inspector of Boilers which was initially made on adhoc basis was regularized with approval of the Public Service Commission. The Commission's approval was manifestly based on satisfaction of the above three requirements.
Somehow it was brought to the notice of the Administrative Department that the Competency Certificate at S. No: (ii) hereinabove, allegedly produced by the appellant was not genuine. As such the appellant was called upon by notice dated 6th March, 1980 to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. He submitted his explanation overriding therein that the allegations of fraud and fabrication levelled against him were unfounded adding further that the status of the Certificate produced by him was immaterial as the Equivalence Committee while making comparisons found even Third Class Certificate of Alberta Canada superior to that of First Class Certificate issued under Boilers Act 1923.
7. It is obviously appellant's own admission that requirement at S. No: (ii) remained unfulfilled. That is to say that he had produced Third Class Competency Certificate instead of First Class Competency Certificate as required by the rules. His only contention was that since he had produced Third Class Competency Certificate of the Institute of Canada, which was declared by the Equivalence Committee as Superiors to that required by the rules, he had satisfied the necessary requirement of the rules. In support of his view point the appellant's learned counsel invited our reference to the Industrial notification dated 28.9.1980 of amendment of the recruitment rules. Obviously the notification is of no help to the appellant's case. No doubt by the said notification the scope of the requirement at S. No. (ii), hereinabove had been enlarged in as much as that in the alternative of First Class Competency Certificate any other equivalent Certificate could also be produced. But this amendment was not in force when the appellant's adhoc appointment as Inspector of Boiler was notified in 1976 or the said appointment was regularized in 1978. Further more the above amendment brought about the change in the eligibility for appointment to the post of Chief Inspector of Boilers and n6t for the post of Inspector of Boilers with which we are concerned in this case. As pointed out above, the appellant had already been rejected by the Public Service Commission for the post of Chief Inspect of of Boilers, vide the Commission's letter dated 21st August, 1978 addressed to the Secretary, Industries Department.
Apart from above, even the argument of the appellant's learned counsel that third Class Competency Certificate produced by the appellant was declared by the Board of Technical Education as adequate for the appellant's appointment as Inspector of Boiler was for from convincing. First of all the requirement of the relevant rules as stated above was the First Class Competency Certificate and that too issued under the Boilers Act 1923. Secondly the subsequent amendment in the rules which envisaged the production of even equivalent certificate not only came into force long after the appellant's appointment but it did not cover the appointment to the post of Inspector of Boilers. Thirdly the Board of Technical Education was not Competent to grant the certificate of Equivalence. In this connection reference may be made to rule 81 of Sind Boilers Rules 1941, It reads asunder: "81. Exchange certificateAny person in possession of the certificate of proficiency or of competency granted by any competent authority in British India or in the United Kingdom, or in any British Dominion or Colony, shall be entitled to receive a certificate of competency as aforesaid without undergoing examination.
The certificate granted under this rule shall be of such class as the Board of Examiners or a majority of the members of the said Board on consideration of the nature of the certificate in the persons possession shall determine.
Provided that if no scrutiny of the testimonials of an applicant for an exchange certificate of competency under this rule, the Board of Examiners has doubts about the competence of the applicant for the charge and management of a boiler, or if it is necessary to determine the class of certificate for which he is qualified, the Board of Examiners may subject the applicant to such practical examination as it deems fit.
9. The Board of Examiners specified in the above rule is to be constituted in accordance with rule 84 whereby the Provincial Government is empowered to nominate from the to the competent engineers having knowledge of prime movers and boilers to be members of the Board of Examiners. We were informed in course of the arguments that such Board was constituted by Government of Sind, Industries Department only recently by notification dated 6th January, 1990.
According to the Learned Govt, counsel prior to constitution of the said Board, the similar Board working in the province of Punjab used to be consulted in the matters falling within its ambit. Even in the present case, the Punjab Board of Examiners was consulted and its Chairman, by his letter dated 27th July, 1981 had conveyed the detailed views on the issue involved in this case. It may be perhaps be advantageous to reproduce hereunder the said letter: "Mr. Ghulam Kadir Junejo, Section Officer (I), Secretary to Govt, of Sind, Industries Mineral Development Transport, Excise and Taxation Dept. Karachi.
SUB: EQUIVALENCE OF FIRST CLASS CERTIFICATE Reference correspondence resting with your Memorandum No. S.O. (I) 1.19/76, dated the 14th July, 198l on the subject noted above.
2. The Third Class Engineer's Certificate of Competency intimated to have been granted to Mr. Mansoor Raza Zaidi without Examination under Regulations No: 18 (3) (b) of Engineers Regulations framed under the Boilers and Pressure Vessels Act, 1975, Alberta, Canada; has no comparison even with a Third Class Competency Certificate as Boiler Engineer granted by the Board of Examining Engineers, Punjab under the Rules framed under clause (d) of Section 29 of the Boilers Act, 1923. The former is much inferior to the latter.
3. Further while processing the case the following discrepancies have come into notice in respect of the First Class Boiler Engineer's Competency Certificate said to have been obtained by Mr. Mansoor Raza Zaidi in exchange from the Central Boilers Board which may be kept in view while deciding the case finally: 'A' i) That the Certificate is stated to have been given by the Central Boilers Board whereas to grant such a Certificate does not fall within the legal jurisdiction of that Board. ii) The contents of the Certificate show that the same has been granted by the President, Board of Examination Engineers/Attendants, Government of Sind, Karachi and countersigned by two Members of the Central Boilers Board whereas neither any Board with the said name duly constituted under the Boilers Attendants Rules (PART II) of the Sind Boilers Rules, 1941 framed under clause (d) of Section 29 of the Boilers Act, 1923 exists in Karachi and nor any member of the Central Boilers Board is supposed to countersign such a Certificate. iii) in case the said certificate is believed to have been issued by the Board of Examiners, Karachi its nomenclature does not tally with prescribed Certificate Form-Ill, as appears at Appendix to Part II of the Sind Boiler Rules, 1941. viii) The Board of Examiners, Karachi under the Sind Boilers only the Certificates of Competency as First Class or Second Class Boiler Attendants and not the Certificate of Competency as an Engineer/Attendant as mentioned in the copy of the Certificate under consideration. v) Rule 84 of Sind Boiler Rules empowers Provincial Government to nominate competent Engineers to be members of the Board of Examiners and Rule 87 of the said Rules empowers the Chief Inspector to at as Ex. Officio President of the Board of Examiners. The constitution of the Board of Examiners including the Chief Inspector as appearing on 13.5.1978 therefore, must be in the knowledge of the Government of Sind.
Sd/ ( ABDUL WAHID)
CHIEF INSPECTOR OF BOILERS, PB.
FOR CHAIRMAN BOARD OF EXAMINING ENGINEERS, PB.
As is clear from the above letter, the Third Class Competency Certificate of Alberta Canada produced by the appellant has no comparison even with Third Class Competency Certificate granted by Board of Examiners under the Boilers Act 1923. The above letter also makes it clear that the Competency Certificate obtained by the appellant in .Exchange of the one he had received from Alberta Canada was of no consequence because the Central Boilers Board which had granted the said Certificate was not competent to do so. More over the Certificate obtained in Exchange was automatically rendered invalid as soon as the First Class Competency Certificate allegedly conferred by Alberta Canada on whose basis the exchange was approved turned out to be a forged document.
For above reasons we hold that both at the the of his appointment, as Inspector of Boilers and at the the of regularization of the said appointment, the appellant did not possess one of the prescribed qualifications namely that he did not possess First Class Competency Certificate issued under Boilers Act 1923 and consequently, he was not eligible for the said appointment. The impugned order of termination of the appellants services was therefore unexceptionable, not calling for any interference. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Given under our hands and the Seal of this Tribunals on this 15th day of July 1991 at Karachi.