1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
RAFIQ AHMAD Versus I. G. OF POLICE, PUNJAB
| Citation | 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman, Mazhar Munir and S. Hafiz‑ur‑Rahman, Members |
| Parties | RAFIQ AHMAD Versus I. G. OF POLICE, PUNJAB |
| Primary Law | Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Civil Servants Act (VIII of 1974)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: M. Saleem Chaudhry, Chairman, Mazhar Munir and S. Hafiz‑ur‑Rahman, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (RAFIQ AHMAD Versus I. G. OF POLICE, PUNJAB). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 23(2) read with para. 44, Instructions about Confidential Reports ‑ Instructions regarding writing of confidential reports-- Have force of rules‑No specific instance quoted in support of adverse remarks‑Appeal for expunction of such remarks accepted by Service Tribunal‑Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4.
Judgment & Decree
M. SALEEM CHAUDURY (CHAIRMAN).‑Rafiq Ahmad, appellant, worked as Inspector, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Faisalabad, in the year 1976. His Annual Confidential Report for the period from 1‑1‑1976 to 31-8‑1976 was countersigned by the Director, Anti‑Corruption Establishment who gave him satisfactory remarks but, however, added the following:‑‑ "An experienced and intelligent officer. However, at times he is inclined towards the accused." These remarks were conveyed to the appellant. The representation made by the appellant was rejected vide letter dated 17‑12‑1977.
2. The parties have been heard. The appellant ‑has urged that the remarks are ambiguous and contrary to the facts and actual performance of the appellant during the year 1976. He has produced the list of cases conducted by him and pointed out that in none of the cases entrusted to him he recommended to let of any accused and the Superintendent of Police, Anti‑Corruption Establishment, awarded the appellant Commendation Certificate Class II with a cash award of Rs. 100, for the year 1976. Therefore, the appellant contends that the adverse remarks are not justified. These facts were not disputed by the Department but it is stated that the impugned remarks were based upon personal feeling and experience of the Director, ACE, Punjab.
3. In view of the facts narrated by the appellant and in the absence of any specific instances being quoted by the Director, the adverse remark cannot be maintained and merits to be scored out in terms of para. 44 of "The Instructions about the Confidential Reports‑‑Extent of Application" (See page 355 of Chapter III of O & M. Volume I (Revised) which have the force of rule under section 231) of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974. We accept the appeal and order for the expunction of the adverse remarks. Appeal accepted.