As per facts leading to this appeal, the appellant started his sere ice career as police constable in the police department. He was promoted as head constable and as ASI in due course of time. He was promoted as Sub Inspector (S.I.) on 19.9.1988. He was confirmed as such w,e,f, 1.7.1994.
Subsequently the date of his confirmation was changed and appellant was confirmed as S.I. w,e,f, 19.1.1991 through order dated-4.10.2003. Appellant made a representation dated 12.3.2004 requesting for confirmation as S.I. from the date he was actually promoted i,e, 19.8.1988 and also for. antedating his promotion as police Inspector w,e,f, 18.8.1993 in the light of many judgments of this Tribunal in which it was held that regular promotion and confirmation had to be allowed a per police rules from the date of officiating promotion as such. The appellant particularly referred to the judgment dated 10.7.2003 in Service Appeal No, 314/03 of this Tribunal. Representation of the appellant was rejected through impugned orders dated 15.6.2004 on the sole ground that the appellant had already retired w,e,f, 5.1.2004 and he could not claim promotion from back date as he ceased to be a civil servant, hence this appeal before this Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has addressed his arguments emphasizing that in terms of Section 2 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, a civil servant had the right to get service benefits due to him during the C period of his service even after his retirement. Learned counsel has referred to the judgment of this Tribunal reported as 2005 PLC (CS) 337 in that connection vide which it has been held that a civil servant had no control on his retirement o superannuation and delay caused in granting promotion to the appellant had no connection with the civil servant and when promotion/confirmation was allowed earlier to his junior then the senior, even if he had retired, had the right to be considered for promotion/confirmation from the same date. It is further maintained that law has already been settled by this Tribunal as well as. By the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan also that confirmation promotion/appointment and that no discrimination or exception could be made in the case of the appellant. It is finally maintained that the department had also issued orders of ante-dating promotion in respect of many other police officers after their retirement like for example in the case of S.I. Javed Ahmad, S.I. Sohail Ahmad, S.I. Khalid Mahmood and others, but when it came to the appellant, he was being told that he could not be allowed confirmation and promotion from back date since he had retired.
3. Appeal is opposed by the respondents. It is maintained by Respondent No, 3 that the case of the appellant was referred to respondent No, 1/IGP for grant of proforma promotion/confirmation from back date as S.I. and as Inspector, but the said authority has refused to allow the appellant service benefits since the appellant had ceased to be in Govt. Service Respondent No, 1 has opposed the appeal on the ground that in the light of latest proforma promotion policy, the appellant being no more in service had no claim to get promotion from back date. As no comments are received from Respondent No, 2 and 4/IGP and Home Secretary despite repeated reminders they are proceeded ex-parte.
4. I have considered contentions from both sides and also gone through the relevant record. I find that this Tribunal has repeatedly held in many judgments that rights of a civil servant to claim service benefits do not cease on account of his retirement on superannuation because a civil servant had no control over his retirement on superannuation. Law makes a civil servant entitled to claim service benefits due to him during the period of his service. Section (2)(b) of the PST Act 1974 defines a civil servant to be a person who holds a civil province. Appellant retired on 5.1.2004. His retirement could not deprive him of his right to claim benefits, which were admissible to him under the law. IGP has recently issued directions that in pursuance of judgments of this Tribunal and also of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, confirmation has to be allowed from the date of promotion. Appellant has very rightly referred to the orders dated 4.10.2003 of Respondent No, 3 granting promotion/confirmation from back date in respect of 78 police officers in pursuance of various judgments of this Tribunal. No exception could therefore, be made in the case of the appellant. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, I repel the contention of the respondent that as the appellant had now retired he had no claim to get confirmation and promotion as S.I. and then as Police Inspector from the date it was due during his service. Appeal is, therefore, accepted and it is ordered that the appellant shall be considered for grant of service benefits including confirmation as S.I./attendant benefits from the date he was promoted on officiating basis.