— Right of representation against an order of discharge — Scope — Although no right of appeal against the discharge from service is provided under Rule 12.21 of the Police Rules, 1934 but at the same time, niceties of Section 21 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 cannot be ignored wherein it is clearly spelled out that if no provision for appeal or review exists, a civil servant aggrieved by any such order may make a representation to the authority next above the authority which made the order — Likewise, the nitty-gritties of Section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 are also very noteworthy which explicate that where an appeal, review or representation to a departmental authority is provided under the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, or any rules, against any such order no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal unless the aggrieved civil servant has preferred an appeal or application for review or representation to such departmental authority — The petitioner/constable, in the instant case, had filed the departmental appeal and was only non-suited on the ground that no appeal lies against the discharge, but the departmental authority failed to consider that against the order of discharge, representation was maintainable — The departmental Authority should have seen the pith and substance of the grievance lodged by the petitioner rather than focusing solely on the nomenclature of the representation — Even mentioning an incorrect provision of law does not debar or relieve the competent authority from examining the case according to the remedy provided under the law to an aggrieved civil servant — The entire emphasis of the Service Tribunal was on the fact that, instead of filing a service appeal, the petitioner filed a departmental appeal before the DIG of Police, Operations which was not appealable before the departmental authorities in terms of Rule 12.21 of the Police Rules, 1934, hence the departmental appeal was consigned to record being not maintainable — While making this observation both the departmental authority and the Service Tribunal failed to take into account that if a right of appeal or review was not provided in the aforesaid Rule then, in unison, it does not debar or prohibit the civil servant from electing the remedy of filing a representation as of right, which could not be turned down on hyper-technical grounds but should have been decided on merits, rather than rejecting it being non-maintainable as an appeal instead of representation — Appeal was allowed in circumstances and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority. [2024 SCLR 33 = 2024 SCMR 181 = 2023 SCP 355]

— Appeal to Tribunals — Scope — Section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, provides that any civil servant aggrieved by any final order, whether original or appellate, made by a departmental authority in respect of any of the terms and conditions of his service may, within thirty days of the communication of such order to him or within six months of the establishment of the appropriate Tribunal, whichever is later prefer an appeal to the Tribunal — This Section inter alia provides that where an appeal, review or representation to a departmental authority is provided under the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, or any rules, against any such order no appeal shall lie to a Tribunal unless the aggrieved civil servant has preferred an appeal of application for review or representation to such departmental authority and a period of ninety days has elapsed from the date on which such appeal, application or representation was so preferred. [2024 SCLR 33 = 2024 SCMR 181 = 2023 SCP 355]