1991 PLP 1802 (SCMR)
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUJRAT and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN A.S.I. — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1802 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUJRAT and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN A.S.I. — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1802 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1802 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1802 (SCMR) (SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUJRAT and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN A.S.I. — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Akhtar, Additional Advocate-General and A.S. Hashmi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 22nd May, 1989.
- Muhammad Akhtar, Additional Advocate‑General and A.S. Hashmi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated the 12th June, 1985 in Appeal No.965/1189 of 1984).
Art. 212(3)
Allegations levelled by petitioner Authority against respondent were without substance
Judgment of Service Tribunal in favour of respondent both on legal and factual aspects thus was not open to any exception.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM MUJADDID, J: ‑‑The Superintendent of Police, Gujrat, and the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Gujranwala, have filed this petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 12‑6‑1985. The Tribunal by means of the impugned judgment accepted the appeal of the respondent and ordered his reinstatement as officiating Sub‑Inspector with effect from the date when he was reverted. The question of back benefits was left to be determined by the competent authority. On 3‑8‑1951 the ,respondent joined the force as Foot Constable. He was promoted as Head Constable in 1962 and as A.S.I. in 1972. He was appointed as officiating Sub‑Inspector in 1979 and was posted as S.H.O. Kathiala Sheikhan. Action was taken against the respondent on the ground that he registered a false First Information Report of a cognizable offence which resulted in harassment to the accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the same contentions which were raised before the Tribunal and were repelled. The F.I.R. was registered by A.S.I. Bootey Khan. Investigation was conducted by A.S.I. Nazir Ahmad. The challan was submitted by the respondent for approval to the A.S.P. It reached the Prosecuting Inspector who forwarded the same to the Court concerned. The challan was still pending in the Court when the Tribunal decided the appeal. It is, therefore, obvious that there is no substance in the allegations levelled against the respondent. The judgment of the Tribunal both on legal and factual aspects is not open to any exception. Dismissed. H.B.T./S‑461/S Petition dismissed.