SHC orders proceedings against education officials in pension case

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has directed the competent authority to take prompt disciplinary action against all delinquent officials of the education department who allowed an education department officer facing corruption charges to retire without any disciplinary

proceedings.

The direction came on a petition of education department officer Naz Parveen who had moved the court for getting pensionary benefits. She submitted that her pensionary benefits had been withheld on ground of a NAB reference pending against her and others before an accountability court in illegal appointments case.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that pensionary benefits could not be withheld on account of the pendency of a criminal case or departmental proceedings after the lapse of two years from the date of retirement.

The counsel submitted that if a government servant, who had been suspended due to a pending inquiry into his conduct, attained the age of superannuation before the completion of the inquiry, the disciplinary proceedings against him or her shall abate and the period of suspension shall be treated as a period spent on duty.

A provincial law officer submitted that the petitioner was facing a NAB reference and under the Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1973, she was liable to be proceeded against due to being accused of subversion, corruption, and misconduct.

A division bench of the SHC comprising Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar and Justice Adnanul Karim Memon after hearing the case observed that prima facie, the petitioner had a qualifying length of service to her credit which was over 39 years and she stood retired on December 3, 2020. However, not a single penny was paid to her causing hardship.

The SHC observed that the departmental proceedings against the petitioner had not yet been initiated and finalised even after some years of her retirement. The high court observed that the departmental proceedings, therefore,

had no legal consequence and the subsequent departmental orders could not come in the way of the petitioner to claim pensionary benefits. The bench observed that prima facie it was the fault and negligence of the education department that failed to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in time and allowed her to retire from government service in 2020.

The SHC observed that education department officials waited for unknown reasons and withheld the pensionary benefits on account of alleged illegal appointments. The high court observed that prima facie there were mere allegations against the petitioner and there was no conviction against the petitioner by a competent court of law, due to which, the court could not presume that she was guilty of the charges leveled against her.

The bench observed that pensionary benefits of the petitioner could not be stopped on account of any charges and doing so was in violation to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court. The high court directed the parent department of the petitioner and chief secretary to release the pensionary amount to her within two weeks.

The bench directed a competent authority to look into the matter of the petitioner and take prompt disciplinary action against all delinquent officials who in their lethargic attitude failed and neglected to take disciplinary action against the petitioner within the stipulated time and allowed the petitioner to retire from service in 2020.