I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and to state that Sections
7(f)(ii) and 13(5)(ii) of the PEEDA Act, 2006 read as under:-
7(f) (ii)
“Where charge of absence from duty for a period of more than one year is proved against the accused, the penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service shall be imposed upon the accused.”
13(5)(ii)
“impose any one or more of the penalties specified in section 4:
Provided that
(i) Where charge or charges of grave corruption are proved against an accused, the penalty of dismissal from service shall be imposed, in addition to the penalty of recovery, if any; and
(ii) Where charge of absence from duty for a period of more than one year Is proved against the accused, the penalty of compulsory retirement or removal or dismissal from service shall be imposed upon the accused.”
2. As per above provisions of law, in case charge of absence from duty for more than one year is proved, no other penalty can be imposed except the penalties of compulsory retirement or removal from service or dismissal from service.
3. It has been observed that the competent authorities grant leave to the officers for one or two years to improve their studies during service like Ph.D., M.Phil, FCPS or other postgraduate qualification either under the Study Leave Rules or EOL (without pay) for the purposes of study. However, extension in leave for study purposes is not timely decided for one or the other reasons. In such cases, the officers submit applications for extension in leave in routine and continue their studies without extension in leave. On the other hand, the authorities do not decide cases timely. subsequently, such officers are declared absent from duty and proceeded against under PEEDA Act, 2006. They are awarded one of the major penalties provided in sections 7(f)(ii) and 13(5\ii) of the PEEDA Act, 2006 i.e., compulsory retirement, removal from service or dismissal from service. Due to such situation, professional /technical manpower diminishes and the degrees acquired by them are become no more useful in the public sector. Such persons, after removal from service, join private sector. The public sector suffers on that account.
4. The provisions of awarding one of the three major penalties in the case of absence from duty for more than one year were included in the PEEDA Act, 2006 to enforce the discipline and to make the officers regular and punctual in their duties. However, where the officers have been allowed leave for the study purposes, their cases for extension in leave have to be decided on merit expeditiously and on time or at the very outset of the course or programme like Ph.D is allowed to be undertaken which in no case can be completed within one or two years.
5. The Competent Authority has accordingly directed that in future all cases of extension in leave for study purposes may be decided on merit timely to avoid administrative inconvenience, undue hardship to the scholars and harm to the public
interest.
No. SORI(S&GAD)17-10/2015
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
SERVICES & GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT (REGULATIONS WING)
Dated Lahore, the 30th April, 2015
Page 01
Post a Comment