IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CIVIL PETITION NO. 873 OF 2021 
(On appeal against the judgment dated 02.02.2021 
passed by the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore in 
Appeal No. 12(L)/2017) 
 
Muhammad Yaseen  
 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
VERSUS 
Secretary, Ministry of Interior & Narcotics Control, Narcotics Control 
Division, Islamabad and another 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Manzar Abbas Khokhar, ASC 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
For the State: 
Ch. Ehtisham ul Haq, Special Prosecutor ANF 
Mr. Muhammad Tariq, Joint Director Law, ANF 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
25.07.2023 
 
JUDGMENT 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Through this petition under Article 
212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner 
has called in question the legality of the judgment dated 02.02.2021 passed by 
the learned Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the service appeal filed by 
the petitioner was dismissed and the penalty of dismissal from service imposed 
by the departmental authority was upheld.   
2. 
 
Briefly stated the facts of the matter are that petitioner was serving 
as ASI in the Anti Narcotics Force. On 03.02.2016, he was charge-sheeted on the 
allegation that he illegally took/snatched an amount of Rs.103,000/- from civilian 
Khalid Mehmood (PW-2) when a picket was set by ANF officials on Sargodha 
Khushab Road. An inquiry was conducted and on the recommendations of the 
Inquiry Officer, major penalty of dismissal from service was awarded to the 
petitioner. He filed departmental appeal, which was declined vide order dated 
28.11.2016. He then filed appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore, but 
CIVIL PETITION NO. 873 OF 2021 
-: 2 :-
it also met the same fate vide impugned judgment. Hence, this petition seeking 
leave to appeal.  
3. 
 
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner contended 
that the co-accused of the petitioner, who were charge-sheeted on the same 
allegation, have been dealt leniently by the department as minor penalties of 
censure have been awarded to them whereas a harsh penalty of dismissal from 
service has been imposed upon the petitioner. Contends that the petitioner had 
an unblemished service record of 33 years and was at the verge of retirement 
when he was dismissed from service and depriving him the retirement benefit 
would not be in the interest of justice.  
4. 
 
On the other hand, learned Special Prosecutor ANF vehemently 
opposed this petition by contending that the petitioner was directly charged for 
taking money from Khalid Mehmood (PW-2), therefore, his case being 
distinguishable, he was rightly awarded major penalty of dismissal from service.  
5. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and 
have perused the evidence available on the record with their able assistance.  
6. 
 
There is no denial to this fact that the petitioner along with three 
other ANF officials was charge-sheeted for illegally taking/snatching an amount 
of Rs.103,000/- from Khalid Mehmood (PW-2) and a joint inquiry in this regard 
was conducted by Mr. Maqbool Ahmed, Deputy Director, ANF. After inquiring 
into the matter, the Inquiry Officer recommended imposition of minor penalties 
on the co-accused of the petitioner namely (i) Muhammad Zeb, Inspector, (ii) 
Amjad Ali, Inspector and (iii) Usman Shafique, Constable. The perusal of record 
shows that Constable Usman Shafiq was awarded the penalty of censure along 
with stoppage of increments for three years whereas Inspector Amjad Ali was 
given the punishment of forfeiture of approved service upto 02 years along with 
stoppage of increments for three years. However, there is no mention as to what 
minor penalty was awarded to Muhammad Zeb Inspector. On our specific query 
as to why the petitioner has been treated differently, learned Law Officer stated 
that his case is distinguishable from that of the other ANF officials. However, he 
could not spell out the same from the record. We have noted that in his 
statement before the Inquiry Officer, Khalid Mehmood stated that the petitioner 
CIVIL PETITION NO. 873 OF 2021 
-: 3 :-
Muhammad Yasin, Constable Usman Shafiq and Ashfaq Ahmed snatched 
Rs.103,000/- from him but later returned the same in a Police Station situated in 
Saddar Bhalwal. It is clear from his statement that the case of the petitioner was 
not distinguishable from the others. Even otherwise, we have noted that during 
cross-examination, the said Khalid Mehmood took an altogether different stance 
and stated that the petitioner had taken Rs.8000/- from him directly, therefore, 
both the stances taken by him are at variance. The said Khalid Mehmood stated 
that when he was stopped by the petitioner and other ANF officials, an amount 
of Rs.175,000/- was in his wallet. However, this is also a matter of consideration 
as to truthfulness of such stance. We have been informed that the petitioner has 
33 years of unblemished service on his part and during these proceedings, his 
retirement age has passed. After serving the department for such a long period, 
the pensionary benefits are the right of an employee, which enable him to spend 
rest of his life peacefully. Article 25(1) of the Constitution ordains defiance of 
discrimination. However, by dismissing the petitioner from service while 
awarding minor penalties to the other officials, the petitioner has been 
discriminated against and the learned Service Tribunal did not take into 
consideration this aspect of the matter. As the petitioner has since retired from 
service, hence, no order for reinstatement is required.  
7. 
 
For what has been discussed above, we convert this petition into 
appeal, allow it, set aside the impugned judgment to the extent of the petitioner 
and direct the respondent No. 2 to similarly treat the petitioner as his co-
accused/colleagues were dealt with by awarding him minor penalty. If the date of 
retirement of the petitioner has passed, all pensionary benefits for which he is 
entitled, shall be given to him within a period of two months from the date of 
receipt of certified copy of this order.  
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
25th of July, 2023 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram