PHC dismisses writ petitions of 37 KP govt officials against show-cause notices

Voluntary Return with NAB

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Thursday dismissed the writ petitions of over 37 officials filed against the show-cause notices issued to them by their respective departments in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

They had been asked to explain why they should not be removed from service in the light of the Supreme Court’s directions for entering into voluntary return with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in corruption cases and continuing with the jobs. A two-member bench comprising Chief Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Muhammad Ghazanfar Khan dismissed the writ petitions in the preliminary hearing after recording arguments from the lawyers of the petitioners.

Syed Attiqur Rehman, Akhtar Hussain and 35 others from the Communication and Works Department, Physical Health and Engineering Department and Revenue Department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) had filed the writ petitions.

The petitions were against the show-cause notices issued to them by their respective departments. They had been asked to explain within seven days why they should not be removed from service and sent home after the Supreme Court directions to the provinces to take action against officials who had entered into the voluntary return with the NAB in cases of corruption and misuse of authority.

The officials claimed in the petition that they were being discriminated against compared to other provinces of the country and the federal capital, Islamabad. They requested the court to direct their respective departments to take disciplinary action only as per the Government Servants E & D Rules, 1973.

The petitioners submitted that in the federal capital and other provinces, the government appointed inquiry officers for conducting departmental action against the officials who had entered into voluntary return with the NAB. They said in the KP they were directly issued show-cause notices for removing them from the services, adding, it was against the law and discrimination with them.

During hearing, the petitioners’ lawyers argued that in KP the Establishment Department misinterpreted the Supreme Court directions in the voluntary return cases and issued show-cause notices to the petitioners without inquiry. They said this was against the Government Servants E&D Rules, 1973.

They submitted that the Supreme Court had directed the chief secretaries of the provinces to take disciplinary actions against those officials under the E & D Rules, 1973 who had entered into voluntary return with the NAB in corruption and corrupt practices cases and continued holding their jobs without stigma.

However, the lawyers pointed out that in KP the Establishment Department issued a proforma and asked the petitioners to fill it and reply as to why they should not be terminated from their jobs as per the directions of the Supreme Court.

The lawyers also cited an example from the federal capital about the action taken against the officials as per the Supreme Court directions in which the Establishment Division had first appointed an inquiry officer, Amjad Javed Saleemi for initiating disciplinary proceedings against Nisar Ahmad Khan, a former district police officer of Nowshera who had made a voluntary return deal with NAB and returned money under the terms of Section 25(a) of NAB Ordinance 1999.

They said in KP the Establishment Department misinterpreted the Supreme Court directions and thus the high court was the competent court to correct the errors and order the authorities to comply with the apex court order as per the issued directions.

The lawyers prayed the court to either issue direction restraining the respective departments from any adverse action till a decision in the petitioners’ review petitions submitted in the Supreme Court or direct the Establishment Department to follow the E & D Rules while taking disciplinary action against the petitioners instead of directly sending them home.