' MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J---The petitioner is again before this Court. Admittedly he is an Electrician in BS-4 with the respondent-Department. In the first instance he applied on 1-2-2000 for move- over/promotion as Junior Clerk in BS-5 in the light of circular letter dated 30-7-1996 (annex. C). In response his services were terminated on the ground of over-age vide letter dated 4-5-2000. He filed an appeal which was allowed by learned Punjab Service Tribunal on 2-4-2003 (Annex.D). In the meantime, he improved his academic qualification. He filed W.P. No,1688 of 2004 in this Court complaining that his application for promotion is not being attended to against 20% posts of Junior Clerks for promotion of employees in BS-4. This W.P. Was dismissed on 15-4-2004 on the ground that individual application cannot be ordered to be taken up and let applications be invited from all the relevant employees. On 9-6-2004, an advertisement was issued for filling up 12 vacancies of Junior Clerks. He filed an application but was not permitted to sit in the test on the ground of over- age. He again approached this Court by filing W.P. No,3074 of 2004. This time this Court directed the respondents to consider the application in accordance with law. This application has again been turned down on the same ground. The D. P.O., Khanewal and DIG., Multan Range in their respective replies have admitted the factual position but have stated that since no relaxation is available, his application has rightly not been considered. The IGP, Punjab in his written reply dated 17-3-2005, has however, fully supported the petitioner's case and has assured that he will be allowed to sit in the test for promotion whenever convened.
2. In view of the said state of affairs emerging from the said pleadings on record, notice having been issued and learned A.A.-G. Having put in appearance this case is being decided as a PACCA case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Rules 3 (v) of the Punjab Civil Servants Recruitment (Relaxation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1976, to urge that the IGP, Punjab has taken a correct decision whereas the DIG and DPO, Multan are not supported by law. Learned A.-A.G, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the said Rules being relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner does go to support the position taken by the IGP, Punjab. There is no denial that the petitioner is already working in the Police Department and in this view of the matter his entire period of continuous service shall be excluded for the purpose of upper age limit prescribed under Service Rules from his age. Applying the said statutory Rules, the petitioner cannot be stated to be over-age for the said post.
4. Writ petition accordingly is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Junior Clerk in BS-5 without any further loss of time in accordance with law.
5. No orders as to costs.