فوجداری مقدمہ میں سرکاری ملازم کی سزا یابی کا اسکی سرکاری ملازمت پر کیا اثرھوگا

 2024 YLR 1052
Shared by Qaisar Farooq Advocate
After effects of sentence on government service.

Awarding of punishment even on judicial sentence is not an automatic phenomenon rather a departmental inquiry is must and procedure is explained in Rule 16.24; conclusion of departmental inquiry is subject to decision on review under Rule 16.28 or on appeal under Rule 16.29. Even otherwise Rule 16.2 (2) above does not require to impose punishment if the civil servant is convicted rather it is the sentence that decides taking of departmental action and there is difference between conviction and sentence. Such rule authorizes infliction of punishment of dismissal only if the police officer is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month or to any other punishment not less severe. But in this case, petitioner has been finally sentenced to Arsh and Daman which are compensatory punishments. Therefore, under the Police Rules he should not have been dismissed from service but this situation could only be attended after departmental inquiry.

As per clause S.8 (a) of PEEDA Act, 2006, dismissal on conviction is only for offence of corruption etc. whereas for all other offences action under sections 7 or 9 of the Act is mandatory. Section-9 regulates the process of imposition of penalty after regular inquiry whereas section 7 though authorizes the authority to dispense with conduct of an inquiry and pass sentence after giving a show cause notice, yet it says that it must be in the presence of accused civil servant and in said eventuality authority can impose any one or more penalties mentioned in section 4; which makes it clear that penalty of dismissal from service is not mandatory in every situation. Authority can exercise discretion keeping in view the nature of allegations, past conduct of police official and length of service. This expression has also a support from excerpts of Rule 7.5 of Civil Service Rules (Punjab) Volume-I .

PEEDA Act, 2006 is not applicable on employees of Police, they obviously would be governed under Chapter-XVI of Police Rules, 1934 and when they are being dealt under such rules, above excerpts shall also be kept in the mind. It is concluded that if any order adverse to the interest of petitioner has been passed at his back, it can well be challenged under the law.

Crl. Revision.340-13

IFTIKHAR AHMED VS THE STATE ETC