JAVED SHEIKH vs PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R — 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNAL

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

JAVED SHEIKH VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R. 4(IV)---Charges against police official, levelling of---Concurrent departmental and criminal proceedings, initiation of---Acquittal from Criminal Court---Scope and effect---Dismissal from service---Scope---Allegation against appellant (dismissed constable) was that of taking away stolen property from an accused of an FIR---Plea of the respondents (Police Department) was that acquittal from court would not constitute a bar to initiate further disciplinary proceedings against the civil servant as criminal proceedings and disciplinary proceedings against the civil servant were independent in nature having different consequences---Validity---Though a civil servant can be dismissed from service in disciplinary proceedings even after acquittal from the competent court if he is found guilty during inquiry, however, in the present case, the appellant had filed (present) service appeal after his acquittal from the court---Gilgit-Baltistan Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned dismissal orders being invalid which were issued without following the proper procedure and reinstated the appellant to his post as FC in GB Police declaring him entitled to back benefits from the date of his dismissal---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALBookmark this Case JAVED SHEIKH VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R. 4(IV)---Powers of inquiry officer---Transgression---Effect---Punishment of dismissal from service, passing of---Scope---Allegation against appellant (dismissed constable) was of taking away stolen property from an accused of an FIR---Validity---No order of appointment of inquiry officer was available on file/record---Though in a paragraph of relevant Show-Cause Notice, while mentioning a name, it was written that he (citing said name) was appointed as inquiry officer---Inquiry officer concluded the inquiry with recommendations as "To sum up the whole discussion as I conclude that accused officer found guilt and proved the charges leveled against him. However, accused sent to judicial lock up after due completion of investigation" ('recommendation-in-question'); the words "accused sent to judicial lock up" mentioned in recommendation-in-question signalized that appellant was in police custody and inquiry officer had sent him to judicial lock up by exercising the powers of Criminal Court---Even, the inquiry officer had not recommended any kind of penalty to appellant; instead, he had convicted the appellant in criminal case stating therein that he was found guilty and proved the charge levelled against him and sent the appellant to judicial lock up, therefore, he had exercised his jurisdiction not vested to---Gilgit-Baltistan Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned dismissal orders being invalid which were issued without following the proper procedure and reinstated the appellant to his post as FC in GB Police declaring him entitled to back benefits from the date of his dismissal---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALBookmark this Case JAVED SHEIKH VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R. 4(IV)---Charges against police official---Concurrent departmental and criminal proceedings, initiation of---Acquittal from Criminal Court---Scope and effect---Dismissal from service---Scope---Allegation against appellant (dismissed constable) was that of taking away stolen property from an accused of an FIR---Validity---Record revealed that the police department had also failed to prove the allegations of taking away of stolen property in criminal case against the appellant before the concerned Judicial Magistrate and the appellant had been acquitted from the charges leveled against him in criminal case and, admittedly, no appeal against the said acquittal order had been filed before any court yet---Thus, the acquittal order had also attained its finality on the same issue/allegation---Currently, two conflicting orders were in field, one order was acquittal from the charges by the Magistrate and another order was of dismissal of appellant from service by the IGP which had been made impugned in the service appeal---It is well settled rule that the court order takes precedence over the order of IGP---Gilgit-Baltistan Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned dismissal orders being invalid which were issued without following the proper procedure and reinstated the appellant to his post as FC in GB Police declaring him entitled to back benefits from the date of his dismissal---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALBookmark this Case JAVED SHEIKH VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT Reinstatement into service---Back benefits, entitlement to---Scope---Grant of back benefits to an employee having been reinstated by the Court/Tribunal or Department, is a rule and denial of such benefits is an exception on the proof that such person had remained gainfully employed during such period---Once employee is reinstated in service after his exoneration of the charges levelled against him, the period during which he remained either suspended or dismissed cannot be attributed as fault on his part as his absence during this period was not voluntary on his part but it was due to order not to attend his job/duty, because on the basis of charge sheets, he was suspended and later on dismissed---Exoneration of appellant from the charges would mean that he shall stand restored in service, as if he was never out of service. Citation Name: 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNALBookmark this Case JAVED SHEIKH VS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R. 4(IV)---Documentary evidence, absence of---Dismissal from service---Scope---Allegation against appellant (dismissed constable) was that of taking away stolen property from an accused of an FIR---Validity---Respondents/Department had failed to establish that the appellant had committed misconduct by not producing supporting documentary evidence/proof as they had not attached any single piece of paper to substantiate and strengthen their arguments/contention raised in their para-wise comments---Similarly, the facts and grounds narrated in relevant paras of the impugned dismissal order were mere assertions without any proof---Hence, said grounds could not be taken into consideration because there was no documentary evidence available on case file---Even, no record of confessional statement of appellant, recovery memo(s), statement of alleged recovery witness, notice on case file regarding the hearing/personal hearing of the appellant before passing the impugned dismissal order was annexed with para-wise comments---Respondents/Department had miserably failed to present any documentary proof to substantiate their contention made in the para-wise comments and validate their arguments---Gilgit-Baltistan Service Tribunal set-aside the impugned dismissal orders being invalid which were issued without following the proper procedure and reinstated the appellant to his post as FC in GB Police declaring him entitled to back benefits from the date of his dismissal---Appeal was allowed accordingly.

JAVED SHEIKH vs PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT R — 2025 PLC(CS) 1148 GILGIT-BALTISTAN-SERVICE TRIBUNAL

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC