The POSTMASTER GENERAL SINDH PROVINCE, KARACHI vs SYED FARHAN S — 2022 SCMR 1154 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

The POSTMASTER GENERAL SINDH PROVINCE, KARACHI VS SYED FARHAN S. 5(1)---Service Tribunal, powers of---Scope---'Negligence' and 'gross negligence'---Distinction---Expression "negligence" connotes a dearth of attentiveness and alertness or disdain for duty---Genus of accountability and responsibility differentiates and augments an act of gross negligence to a high intensity rather than an act of ordinary negligence---To establish gross negligence, the act or omission must be of a worsened genre whereas ordinary negligence amounts to an act of inadvertence or failure of taking on the watchfulness and cautiousness which by and large a sensible and mindful person would bring into play under the peculiar set of circumstances---In unison, recklessness is a mental state or state of mind which is adjudged both subjectively and objectively---Gross negligence or recklessness in performing the designated or assigned duty are both flagrant acts of negligence and tantamount to misconduct which is of course subject to realizing and understanding the gravity and seriousness of the allegations of misconduct complained of---Sometimes a little or minor mistake or negligence or inefficiency may cause serious disaster or devastation and have severe ramifications---So, while declaring or weighing any act of negligence or inefficacy vis-Ã -vis the penalty imposed by the management, either major or minor, and before the conversion of the sentence, the Service Tribunal is bound to revisit the entire evidence available on record with the inquiry findings and report and, if conversion is required in the interest of justice, then it should be with due weightage, commensurate and proportionate to the gravity of charges and act of negligence/inefficiency and not on the basis of an uncontrolled or unbridled exercise of discretionary powers of the Tribunal without any raison d'Ãªtre. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1154 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case The POSTMASTER GENERAL SINDH PROVINCE, KARACHI VS SYED FARHAN Punishment---award and quantum of punishment---Scope---award of appropriate punishment under the law is primarily the function of the concerned administrative authority and the role of the Tribunal/Court is rather secondary---Court ordinarily would not substitute its own finding with that of the said authority unless the latter's opinion is unreasonable or is based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations or is against the law declared---Law provides for more than one kind of punishments keeping in view the object of such penal provisions and the gravity of the charge in a case---Conceptually punishment to a delinquent public servant is premised on the concept of retribution, deterrence or reformation---In awarding punishments, the competent authority has to keep in mind the underlying object of law and the severity of the misconduct. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1154 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case The POSTMASTER GENERAL SINDH PROVINCE, KARACHI VS SYED FARHAN Post Office Manual, Vol. IV, Appendix No. 27---Junior Accountant, General Post Office (GPO)---Negligence and inefficiency in supervising subordinate official found guilty of committing fraud---Major penalty of removal from service converted into minor penalty of withholding of promotion for a period of three year---In the present case, the respondent was found guilty of failing to perform his acute and crucial responsibility of checking and supervision---Respondent was not found directly guilty of misappropriation or embezzlement of pension fund for his own benefit, on the contrary, the main accused was convicted by the Court and also repaid the misappropriated amount to the department---In cases where public money and its embezzlement is involved or at stake, the responsible persons cannot be let free or exonerated with low degree of minor penalty---Quantum of punishment should be proportionate and complementary to the charge of misconduct even for the minor act of negligence and inefficiency committed by the delinquent in his duties so that the punishment even in the minor category should be of such kind which may create at least some deterrence for the delinquent and other employees to be more vigilant and attentive to their duties in future rather than performing the tasks with callous attitude---Respondent had failed to perform and fulfill his duties in accordance with the job description of Junior Accountant as prescribed in Post Office Manual, Volume IV, Appendix No. 27---Service Tribunal itself found the respondent inefficient in performing his duties as required under the Rules and further held that, had he performed his duties as prescribed under the Rules, the alleged offence of misappropriation of government money could have easily been anticipated---In such circumstances conversion of sentence of removal of service by the Tribunal into penalty of withholding of promotion for a period of one year only was neither sufficient nor justified---Civil petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and penalty of withholding of promotion for a period of one year was modified and converted into penalty of withholding of promotion for a period of three years without accumulative effect. Head NotesCase Description

The POSTMASTER GENERAL SINDH PROVINCE, KARACHI vs SYED FARHAN S — 2022 SCMR 1154 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR