2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

K.B. ABID (MEMBER-II).

The appellant had filed the representation before Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Lahore Range and requested that he may be granted promotion in the rank of A.S.-I. and S.-I. from 23-10-1993 and 18-9-1997 that is the date from which the next junior Muhammad Ashfaq was promoted to rank of S.-I. The representation of the appellant had been rejected by C.C.P.O. on 12-3-2007 on the grounds that the appellant at present is officiating H.C. and large number senior to him are awaiting promotion as (Exempte) A.S.-I. which cannot claimed as a matter of right. Mr. Ashfaq Ahmad S.-I. was promoted on ad hoc basis by the then Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Traffic Punjab unauthorizedly and did not maintain by this District. The representationist was admitted So List C-II w.e.f. 23-1-1989 and promoted as H.C. w.e.f. 5-11-1990. He is junior to S.-I. Ashfaq Ahmad who was admitted to C-II list on 11-1-1987 and confirmed as H.C. w.e.f. 9-10-1989.

2. The appellant had joined the service in police department as a constable on 18-3-1975. The appellant became overage for the Lower Class Course and his name was admitted to promotion list C-II, on 23-1-1989. He was promoted as H.C. w.e.f. 5-11-1990. Since then he has been serving as H.C. The counsel has also pointed out that the appellant has not been promoted as A.S.-I. despite the fact that he has unblemished service record. The juniors to the appellant were promoted upto the rank of S.-I. in similar circumstances. One Riaz-ul-Haq has been promoted as A.S.-I. w.e.f. 8-8-1990 and confirmed as such w.e.f. 24-1-1995. Similarly he was further admitted to List-E w.e.f. 18-5-1997 and promoted as S.-I. w.e.f. 19-2-2000. The respondent No.3 Ashfaq Ahmad No.5293 of Traffic Police was appointed on 31-3-1975. Similarly, respondent No.4 Muhammad Saleem, H.C. No.1097 who joined service on 6-3-1980 and entered into C-II on 19-4-1993 and promoted H.C. on 13-1-1991. The rule of consistency demands that equal treatment should have been given to all the police officials including the appellant. The appellant had filed the representation for promotion on due date but no consideration was given, hence feeling aggrieved the service appeal has been filed in P.S.T. under section 4 of P.S.T. Act, 1974.

3. Respondents in comments to the appeal have stated that the appellant without passing the Lower Class Course could not be further promoted as A.S.-I. merely on the basis of good entries in his service record as he was promoted as Head Constable only on the recommendations by the office of I.-G.P., Punjab. The case of the appellant is different from Mr. Ishfaq Ahmad H.C. No.5293. He was promoted to the rank of A.S.-I. and then to the rank of S.-I. on orders of the Senior Police Officers.

4. Record perused. Arguments of the counsel heard. The impugned order, dated 12-3-2007 mentions that the officiating promotion was given by the then Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Traffic, Punjab unauthorizedly. In case, the unauthorized promotion as H.C. was given to respondent No.3, then the concerned competent authority should have taken administrative action for withdrawal of the officiating promotion orders. The appellant is working as officiating H.C. since 5-11-1990. As per Police Rules, the departmental authorities are bound to confirm the officiating promotion, after completion of probationary period. The appellant had not been confirmed due to slackness of departmental authority. By virtue of the continuous appointment without any adverse entries in the service record, the appellant is entitled for confirmation in the rank of H.C. w.e.f. 5-11-1990. He is allowed the confirmation as H.C. from this date. The departmental authorities were also legally bound to arrange the training for the Intermediate Class Course. The date of birth of the appellant as stated by him is 1-11-1952. At the time of officiating promotion, he was in the age of 38 years and eligible for attending Intermediate Class Course. The Police Rules specify that the police official must be sent to promotion course on due and they are not allowed to become overage for attending the training course. The departmental authorities have not shown any proof that the appellant was sent for Intermediate Class Course. The appellant had become overage due to slackness and in action on the part of departmental authorities. The plea of the respondents that the appellant has not qualified the Intermediate Class Course is not accepted at this belated stage. The claim of the appellant for further promotion is established. In similar cases, the P.S.T. has already allowed Muhammad Younis H.C. promotion as A.S.-I. vide judgment No.2702 of 2005 dated 1-12-2005. This judgment of the P.S.T. was implemented by C.C.P.O. Lahore. Directions are given to respondents to confirm the appellant H.C. w.e.f. 5-11-1990, thereafter he will be allowed the officiating promotion as A.S.-I. from the date his next junior confirmed H.C. was promoted as A.S.-I. He will be allowed the confirmation as A.S.-I. from the date of officiating promotion. The appellant will be entitled all financial benefits. H.B.T./10/PST Appeal allowed.