1988 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

KH. MUHAMMAD YOUSAF (MEMBER).‑‑This order will dispose off the appeals filed by M/s. Muhammad Riaz, ex‑Constable No.851, Muhammad Nawaz, ex‑Constable No.912, Muhammad Hussain, ex- Constable No.237 and Mazhar Khan, ex‑Constable No.298, District Police Jhang under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974. They have impleaded the Superintendent of Police, Jhang, Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Faisalabad Range, Faisalabad and Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, Lahore as respondents.

2. Briefly stated the facts of these cases are that the appellants were posted in Police Lines, Jhang and were deputed as a special guard for escorting of Mushtaq Ahmad, ex‑ASI and Mohammad Ali Shah, ex‑Constable accused in case FIR No.138, dated 11‑6‑1983 a/s 302/201/330/342, PPC, P.S. Bhowana from District Jail, Jhang to the Court of Resident Magistrate Bhowana at Chiniot in a complaint case u/s 342/406, PPC pending in the said Court. The appellants allowed the said accused to escape from their custody. Consequently a case was registered against the appellants a/s 223/224, PPC at P.S. Chiniot. The appellants were also proceeded departmentally. Consequently the appellants were served with show‑cause notice under Rule 6(3)(a) of Punjab Police (Efficiency & Discipline) Rules, 1975. The appellants Muhammad Riaz No.851 and Mazhar Khan No.298 were dismissed from service, whereas appellants‑‑ Muhammad Nawaz No.912 and Mohammad Hussain No.237 were discharged from service with immediate effect by the S.P. Jhang vide his order dated 22‑11‑1984. The appellants then filed representations before the D. I.‑G. Police, Faisalabad Range, Faisalabad which too were dismissed vide D.I.‑G's orders dated 6‑5‑1985. The appellants made further representations to the I.‑G. Police, Punjab, Lahore which were also dismissed on 24‑6‑1986. The appellants were acquitted from the said criminal case from the Court of Magistrate, 1st Class on 9‑12‑1986. The appellants then filed the present appeals before this Tribunal on 22‑1‑1987 and have submitted applications under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

3. We have gone through the record of these cases and heard the learned counsel for appellants at length. We are of the considered opinion that the appeals of the appellants are time‑barred. The appellant's representations were rejected by the D.I.‑G. on 6‑5‑1985 and by the I.‑G. on 24‑6‑1986. The appellants should have filed the present appeals within 30 days of its rejection by the Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, Lahore. The appellants failed to do so in time and filed the present appeals before this Tribunal after lapse of six months. The plea of the appellants is that they did not file the appeals before this Tribunal in time as a criminal case against them was pending adjudication before the Magistrate 1st Class, Chiniot as the same was decided on 9‑12‑1986, and therefore, they deemed it fit to file the appeals before this Tribunal. The plea of the appellants for condonation of delay does not inspire confidence and no valid ground has been made out in this behalf. The appellants filed the representations before the D.I.‑G. and I.‑G. and they could also file the appeals before this Tribunal. The plea of the appellants is devoid of any force.

4. The upshot of the above discussion is that the applications of the appellants under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay are rejected and the appeals of the appellants are dismissed as time‑barred in limine. S.Q./146/Sr.P Appeals dismissed.