| Case ID |
23496174-15b3-4433-b386-0f37569c5cdc |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
223/818 of 1984 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 27, 1984 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
In the matter of Nazir Ahmad's appeal against the orders passed by the Director Food, Punjab, the Service Tribunal of Punjab meticulously examined the allegations of negligence leading to significant loss of wheat stock. The appellant, employed as a Foodgrains Supervisor, was accused of failing to safeguard government property during adverse weather conditions, specifically heavy rainfall in 1976-77. The tribunal scrutinized the procedural adherence, noting that the appellant did not file the mandatory form S-1, which is essential for reporting discrepancies and requesting protective measures. Despite the appellant's claims of external factors contributing to the loss, the evidence indicated a direct correlation between his negligence and the financial damage incurred. The tribunal concluded that the appellant's persistent absenteeism and irresponsible conduct were primary factors in the detrimental outcome. Consequently, the tribunal upheld the respondents' orders, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and affirming the penalties imposed on Nazir Ahmad. This decision underscores the importance of adherence to procedural protocols and the accountability of civil servants in maintaining the integrity of their responsibilities. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Nazir Ahmad versus Director Food, Punjab, the Service Tribunal of Punjab addressed critical issues surrounding administrative accountability and procedural adherence within civil service frameworks. Decided on November 27, 1984, under case number 223/818 of 1984, this case delved into the responsibilities of a Foodgrains Supervisor in managing and safeguarding government assets, particularly during adverse conditions. The appellant, Nazir Ahmad, was found negligent in his duties, leading to a substantial loss of wheat stock valued at Rs. 1,73,251.20. The tribunal's decision emphasized the strict compliance required under the Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules of 1975, specifically highlighting Rule 6(3) concerning the show-cause notice procedure. Despite external factors like heavy rainfall in 1976-77, Ahmad's failure to implement necessary protective measures and his absence from duty were pivotal in the tribunal's judgment. Legal representatives, including Haji Mushtaq Ahmad Aqil for the appellant and A. G. Humayun for the respondents, presented their arguments, but the evidence overwhelmingly supported the respondents' stance on administrative negligence. The tribunal's unanimous decision to dismiss the appeal not only reinforced the accountability mechanisms within the Punjab Service Tribunal but also served as a precedent for future cases involving civil service misconduct. Keywords such as 'administrative accountability,' 'civil service negligence,' 'Punjab Service Tribunal,' and 'government asset management' are integral to understanding the case's implications in the legal and administrative domains. |
| Court |
Service Tribunal, Punjab
|
| Entities Involved |
Nazir Ahmad,
Director Food, Punjab
|
| Judges |
S. Abdul,
Jabbar Khan
|
| Lawyers |
Haji Mushtaq Ahmad Aqil,
A. G. Humayun
|
| Petitioners |
Nazir Ahmad
|
| Respondents |
Another,
Director Food, Punjab
|
| Citations |
1985 SLD 2144,
1985 PLC 794
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975
|
| Sections |
6(3)
|