2012 P L C (C.S.) 627
[Balochistan Service Tribunal]
Before Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, Chairman, Muhammad Naeem Khan Ghalzai,
Member- I and Muhammad Anwar Khan, Member -II
SADDAR- UD-DIN
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary, Communication and Works
Department Quetta and another
S.A. No.71 of 2010, decided on 10th August, 2010.
(a) Balochistan Civil Servants Act (IX of 1974) ---
----S. 17---Balochistan Service Tribunals Act (V of 1974), S.4---Fundamental Rules, F.R. No.53-
--Salaries, entitlement to ---Appellant was appointed in the civil works Directorate as Junior
Engineer ---Subsequently when said Directorate was merged into Communication and Works
Department, appellant submitted his arrival report to Secretary, Communication and Works Department ---Appellant was implicated in criminal ca ses and after his release on bail, he was
caught by serious disease of cancer and on account of that he was unable to draw his salaries ---
Authorities had failed to release salaries of the appellant ---Validity ---Record had revealed that
after arrest of app ellant, enquiry was ordered by the then Chief Secretary and Enquiry
Committee was constituted ---In spite of inquiry order no concrete steps had been taken on the
pretext that whereabouts of the appellant was not known--- If whereabouts of the appellant were
not known, to the Enquiry Committee or to the concerned department, publication could have been made in newspaper as envisaged under the provisions of Efficiency and Discipline Rules,
1992---Appellant remained in judicial custody for a long period and he could have been served
through Jail Authorities for initiating departmental proceedings ---Appellant who was
government servant and was under suspension, was entitled for all the benefits under F.R. 53 of
Fundamental Rules ---Authorities were directed to ma ke the payment of the salaries to the
appellant in circumstances.
(b) Civil service ---
----Departmental and criminal proceedings ---Departmental and criminal proceedings were
entirely different ---One related to the enforcement of criminal liability and the other was
concerned with the service discipline.
Amanullah Kanrani for Appellant.
Naseer Ahmad Bangulzai, A.A.- G. and Qasim C&W Representative for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 3rd August, 2010.
JUDGMENT
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, (CHAIRMAN). --- This appeal under section 4 of
the Balochistan Service Tribunals Act 1974 with the following prayer: --
"that the respondents may kindly be directed to release the amount and disburse the salaries in
favour of the appellant in the interest of justice."
2. The relevant facts in small compass are that initially the appellant was appointed in the Civil
Works Directorate as Junior Engineer, which was subsequently merged into Communication and
Works department on 29 -10-1999, and appellant submi tted his arrival report to Secretary C&W
Department on 3rd December, 1999. As per appellant he was implicated by the Anti -Corruption
Police in a criminal cases pertaining to F.I.R. No.l- H/2004, F.I.R. No.l -H/2005 and arrested. It is
the case of the appellant that after his release on bail, he become ill and caught by a serious
disease of cancer and on account of which, he could not able to draw his salaries. He
approached the authority for release of salaries but despite of demand by the Secretary C&W
the Finance department failed to do the needful. He also approached the appellate authority for
release of his salaries by means of representation, which remained unturned. Lastly while finding no other way out, he approached this T ribunal by filing instant appeal.
3. On the other hand, the respondents contested the appeal on legal and factual aspects by filing
their replies.
4. We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and also perused the record with their
assistance.
5. The record reveals that the appellant was arrayed in Crimes No.l -H/2004 and F.I.R. No.l -
H/2005 and was also arrested in pursuance of the said crimes. It is the case of respondent that the
Chief Secretary issued enquiry orders on the charge of fraudulent drawl and embezzlement of
Government Funds i.e. Rs.18471995 and Rs.18549000. The respondent has also stated in reply that whereabouts of the appellant during all that period remained untraceable, hence "Show Cause Notice" could not be served upon him nor any final decision could be taken departmentally.
6. The record reveals that after arrest of appellant, enquiry was ordered by the then Chief
Secretary and an Enquiry Committee comprising Mr. Abdul Karim Additional Secretary Home, Mr. Noor Baloch and Mr. Muhammad Sabir Accounts Officer Finance Department was
constituted. It is painfully observed that in spite of inquiry order; no concrete step has been taken so for on the pretext that the whereabouts of appellant was not known. If the whereabouts of the appellant were not known to the enquiry Committee or to the concerned Department, in such,
circumstances the publication could have been made in newspaper as envisaged under the provisions of Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1992. Admittedly the appellant r emained in
judicial custody for a long period and he could have been served through Jail authorities for initiating departmental proceedings. It is settled principle of law that departmental and criminal proceedings are entirely different. One relates to t he enforcement of criminal liability and the
other is concerned with the service discipline.
7. It is admitted feature of the case that the appellant is a government servant and is under
suspension till date. In such circumstances he is entitled for all the benefits under
Fundamental Rule 53, which speaks as under: ---
"Fundamental Rule 53:
A Government servant under suspension is entitled to the following payments:
(b) In the case of Government servant under, other than that specified in clause (a), he shall
be entitled to full amount of his salary and all other benefits and facilities provided to him under the contract of service, during the period of his suspension."
8. For the discussion made here -in-above we have left with no option but to accept the appeal.
The respondents are directed to make the payment of salaries to the appellant. Parties are left to
bear their own costs.
H.B.T./2/BST Appeal accepted.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.