1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Present: Ihsan‑ul‑Haq Chaudhry Chairman, 10r. Muhammad Yousaf and Ch. Abdul Rashid, Members GHULAM MUHAMMAD Versus SENIOR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and another
| Citation | 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Ihsan‑ul‑Haq Chaudhry Chairman, 10r. Muhammad Yousaf and Ch. Abdul Rashid, Members GHULAM MUHAMMAD |
| Parties | Present: Ihsan‑ul‑Haq Chaudhry Chairman, 10r. Muhammad Yousaf and Ch. Abdul Rashid, Members GHULAM MUHAMMAD Versus SENIOR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and another |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Ihsan‑ul‑Haq Chaudhry Chairman, 10r. Muhammad Yousaf and Ch. Abdul Rashid, Members GHULAM MUHAMMAD.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Present: Ihsan‑ul‑Haq Chaudhry Chairman, 10r. Muhammad Yousaf and Ch. Abdul Rashid, Members GHULAM MUHAMMAD Versus SENIOR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, FAISALABAD and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Noor Muhammad Awan for Appellant.
- A.G. Humayun, District Attorney for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st September, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 4--Punjab police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, R. 4 Appeal against adverse remarks‑‑Police officials proceeded against for misconduct‑ Charge of misconduct not proved because of witnesses resiling from their earlier sand‑‑Adverse remarks, however, were recorded in A.C.R. of appellant‑‑No material on record to prove that appellant had committed misconduct and witnesses had resiled from their original statements‑‑Appellant having been exonerated from the charge of misconduct, there was no justification to make adverse entries against him‑‑Adverse remarks in A.C.R. of appellant were set aside in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
during the year? Nature able to win the witnesses, as of allegations and results. reported by S.P. Faisalabad vide his memo. No. 3581/HC, dated 13‑7‑1985. Though the charge was not proved because of resiling of the Sepoys from their original statements, yet the S.P. concluded that according to the circumstances the A.S.I. did accept the bribe.
2. I have gone through the representation and the relevant documents. The representationist was also granted personal hearing today (22‑6‑1986).
3. From examination of the papers it is evident that the above remarks were recorded after considering all the pros and cons of the case. There is no ground to accept the representatiation. The adverse remarks will continue to reflect in character roll of the representationist." (3) We have made deep appraisal of the entire record and attendant circumstances of the case. Firstly there is no material on record to prove that the appellant has accepted the bribe and the witnesses resiled from their original statements. Furthermore, the appellant was exonerated by the Superintendent of police as well as the D.I.‑G. Faisalabad Range and there was no justification to make adverse entries against the appellant. Thus the charge against the appellant is not proved.
4. In the light of the foregoing discussion Ii the appeal of the appellant is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. There will be no order as to costs. A.A./233/Sr. P Appeal accepted.