' MUHAMMAD AYUB KHAN (MEMBER).---Arguments have been heard and record perused.
2. The appellant while posted as Superintendent under the Respondent Company 'was charge- sheeted and ultimately as a result of the completion of the departmental proceedings, was dismissed from service by the impugned order dated 3-4-1998 against which he preferred a departmental appeal on 11-4-1998 to the competent Authority which was rejected by order dated 2-6-1998, feeling aggrieved therefrom he filed a service appeal before this Tribunal under section 4(1) of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, on 30-6-1998. Both the departmental and service appeals so filed are well within time. , FACTUAL ASPECT
3. A perusal of the records indicates that the appellant joined service under the Respondent company on 12-2-1985 as a Meter Reader, was promoted as Senior Meter Reader on 12-2-1990 vide Annexure-D. Later on the appellant was redesignated as Assistant without the change in his status and emoluments on 3-9-1990 and was transferred to Rawalpindi office the same day at his own request due to compelling domestic affairs/compassionate ground and was promoted as Superintendent with effect from 12-2-1995 and he held the post till his dismissal.
4. It is further alleged at para.4 of the appeal that the appellant remained continuously in association with the Trade Union activities from the date he joined the company in 1985 and had preferred to concentrate on the promotion of trade unionism than in obscurity without accepting any exalting or ostentatious office and in this capacity he had undertaken arduous job of highlighting financial irregularities committed at various tiers of the Company which resulted and tended to diminish the share of the Workers in the overall Company's profits by bringing in lime- light following striking instances of grave administrative/financial irregularities to the notice of the Managing Director, respondent No,2, in 1995-96 for taking remedial measures:-
(i) That Rehan Nawaz, Manager, Rawalpindi Office, allegedly misused tour expenses to Lahore, Sialkot and Gujranwala, as per Annexures F/1 to F/5.
(ii) It is alleged that one G. Yazdani Dar, P.S. To Minister, had drawn a sum of Rs,2, 12,372 equivalent to US $ 6418 as per cash voucher No,147/7, dated 12-7-1995 to defray the baggage expenses but the details of which were never furnished. Likewise about 3,000$ were paid to him vide Cash Vouchers Nos, 452/1 and 453/1, dated 28-1-1996 without any legal justification. He also pin-pointed incurrence of other expenditure at paras.4(d) to (f).
5. It is also 'alleged that on account of the aforesaid conduct he became scapegoat and hence vicitimized in the form of dismissal from service and departmental proceedings were launched against him and simultaneously he was transferred from Rawalpindi to Bhakkar on 30-7-1996 despite the fact that the post of Superintendent (Grade-V) was not available at the LPG Depot, Bhakkar, which fact stands proved from physical inspection report of the Deputy Registrar, NIRC, Islamabad, (copy available at Annexure-M). This Depot was ultimately closed in April, 1997 and the staff so rendered surplus was absorbed in Rawalpindi and Dhurnal Offices. Later on Rawalpindi Office was also closed (wound up) on 30-6-1997.
6. The appellant further states at para.7 of the appeal that he has been involved in a departmental case for alterations-fraudulently in the medical bills submitted by the employees of the Company for the period from February, 1995 to April, 1995 and the enquiry conducted against him was a mockery of the civilized system. It was devoid of transparency and suffered from various grave infirmities which when brought in the notice of the Management, the Deputy G.M. (P&IR) of the Company by letter dated 27-11-1996, closed such illegal proceedings and a fresh opportunity under the law was afforded to the appellant vide Annexure-O, Pige 56 of the file, whereunder the enquiry was reopened and the appellant was allowed to cross-examine the employees who were earlier examined at his back and the appellant was directed to appear for the said purpose on 11-12-1996 at 10-00 a.m. In the Regional Office, Sui Southern Gas Company Limited, 70- Westridge II, Rawalpindi. It is also stated that the second enquiry was conducted on 12-12-1996 and whereafter the appellant has been dismissed from service and that the impugned order of the dismissal is based on malice, without lawful authority, being arbitrary and that the appellant was victimized.
The charge-sheet was based against the appellant on the basis of Test Audit Report emanated from the Chief Manager Incharge Audit to the Managing Director of the Company (respondent No,2) on 21-12-1995 and the appellant was charge-sheeted on 19-3-1996, besides the enquiry against the appellant was conducted in disregard of the mandatory procedure and the rules. Out of twenty employees, whose vouchers were reportedly altered by the appellant only six were produced before the Enquiry Officer in disregard of the letter (Annexure-O), referred to above. A copy of the enquiry report has been annexed as Annexure-Q and the appellant was not allowed to lead evidence in his defence and that he was also not issued a second show-cause notice as well as he was not afforded an opportunity of personal hearing.
7. The respondents have contested the appeal and has prayed that the appeal may be dismissed being totally unjustified, wrong and devoid of legal substance and that the appellant has miserably failed to produce evidence in support of his contention that he was a Trade Unions activist so much so that he has never been Office Bearer/Member, Executive Committee, in any of the four Unions working under the Respondent Company. However, he was misusing the company's funds and the allegations levelled in the appeal are false and fabricated. The Officers mentioned by him in the appeal never misused the funds and the same were utilized after due sanction/approval of the competent authority and that the transfer of the appellant was effected in the public interest as well as in the interest of the Company and in this respect his appeals before a Single Bench and thereafter a Full Bench of the N.I.R.C. Were dismissed by orders dated 19- 2-1997 and 18-6-1998 respectively (copies annexed).
8. The record has carefully been gone through and perused and to repeat again the appellant was transferred from Commercial Department Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi, to L.P.G. Regional Office, 'B'
Unit, Rawalpindi, by order, dated 3-9-1990 at his own request and desire and for this reason he was not allowed, as per the concluding para of the Transfer Order, TA/DA, the transfer being at his own request. The appellant was working as a subordinate in the designation of Assistant under the Respondent-Company and for that matter he was not authorized to act either as Mohtasib or an Auditor and had nothing to do with the Office Administration to check the irregularities of the Officers/officials unless and until authorized to do so by the competent authority. No doubt one G.
Yazdani. Dar, P.S. To Minister was paid US $.6418 in connection with his visit with the Minister to Canada, USA etc. But that payment was made under the sanction of the competent Authority as is evident from the document available at page-35 of the file which contains complete noting's of the various Authorities and it is hoped that the final settlement might have been made by the competent Authority of the Respondent Company. Moreover, a perusal of the documents, copies available at pages-29 to 32, indicates that vide these documents the amounts drawn therein were on account of T.A. By private cars' by road.
9. During the Test Audit of the various bills the irregularities surfaced on the file are available at pages 57 to 59 duly signed by the Chief Manager, Incharge Audit vide which the modus operandi adopted for misappropriation of the amounts was that the appellant subsequently inflated the original less amounts, for instance on 1-3-1995 the actual amount was Rs,105 which was subsequently shown as Rs,405 thereby a sum of Rs,300 was increased. Likewise, on 6-3-1995, the actual amount of Rs,159 was made inflated as Rs,459 with net difference of Rs,300 and so on and so forth and as per the summary, available at page-16 of the file, the excess amount under different heads comes to Rs,15,200 which was misappropriated by the appellant fraudulently and without any legal justification. He had obtained sanction for the actual amount of Rs,7,636 but later on increased/altered the same by Rs,22,836 and thus thereby he devoured/misappropriated a sum of Rs,15,200.
10. Pursuant to the aforesaid discussion the appellant appears to have misappropriated a sum of Rs,15,200 without any legal justification by altering the actual amounts by way of forgery and deception but in the Test Audit the matter got divulged and in order to camouflage/conceal his corrupt practice he started poking nose in the affairs of others by pointing out some, according to him, irregularities which is not the subject of this appeal. He has made a lame excuse but rather a futile exercise to cover up and divert attention of the Authorities concerned, inclusive of this Tribunal, to go scot free but nobody can hide the hard facts. Corruption is a serious charge under the law of the land as well as the code of the Muslims "Al-Qur'an" and "Hadith" of the Holy Prophet of Islam (p.b.u.h.) and, in no case, is excusable and needs to be curbed with an iron hand. The appellant could have also been booked criminally under section 409/419/420 etc. P.P.C. But, it appears, that course has not been initiated against him. Corruption is rampant in our society and should not be dealt with leniently for having damaging/adverse effects on the society as the crimes/vices increase by multiplier effects. A man of humble status as per experience, by way of indulgence in corruption, becomes conspicuous soon and such-like persons demonstrate the ill- gotton wealth which cast adverse affect upon his kith and kins and the persons/people around him. The relevant lines/part from the holy book "Al-Qur'an", Surah Al-Baqrah (2:188) is reproduced hereunder as well as the tradition of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.). {{ARABIC TEXT}} ' Resultantly this appeal fails and is heareby dismissed with costs.Copies of this judgment be sent to all concerned for information.