1. ' MUZAFFAR ALI, J.--- Through this writ petition, the petitioner solicits this Court to issue directives to respondents 1 and 2 in regard to consider the promotion case of the petitioner and to promote the petitioner to the Rank of D.S.P. (BPS-17).
2. ' The facts gave rise to this writ petition are that the petitioner is serving as acting D.S.P.
3. Mashabrum, Ghanche, and the petitioner was at S.No,3 of the seniority of the I.Ps. Of Northern Areas Police, therefore, the Inspector-General of Police Northern Areas (respondent. No,2) had recommended the petitioner for his promotion to the rank of D.S.P. (BPS-17), along with the respondents Nos.5 to 8, vide his letter No,IGP1(6)15936/2005, dated 14-7-2005 to the Secretary Home S&GAD and Law Department Northern Areas Gilgit. The Chief Secretary Northern Areas for unknown reasons, deferred the promotion case of the petitioner without any cogent, legal or factual sanction, hence, this writ petition before this Court.
4. ' We heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate-General for the respondents 1 and 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner laid the basis of his case as under that:- -
(a) The petitioner has a clear record of service and has proved himself to be an efficient and duty full Police Officer in several challenging occasions, during his long standing service career. The learned counsel submitted a series of letters of appreciation as "acknowledgment" of his commendable performance by Officers of high rank in police and administration.
(b) That the petitioner fulfills the conditions laid down in 'the approved recruitment rules i,e, Three years' service in BPS-16 and one year training from police training institute/academy, having no adverse remarks in the A.C.Rs, hence, the petitioner is entitled to be promoted.
(c) That the respondents 5 to 8 are junior to the petitioner, but they have been promoted to the post of D.S.P. And the case of the petitioner has been deferred without leveling any cogent allegation of misconduct, hence, the petitioner is entitled to be promoted in the eye of law.
(d) That the promotion case of the petitioner, has been deferred at such a stage, when the petitioner is at the verge of pension after extending long services to the department with full honesty and diligence, hence this hostile behaviour not only amounts to denial of the reward due to the petitioner, but also against the natural justice.
5. ' The learned Advocate-General for the respondents Nos. I and 2, remarkably conceded the above points raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but urged that the promotion case of the petitioner has been deferred by the Chief Secretary, Northern Areas (respondent No,1) for the only reason that, the petitioner has not been cleared by FMCC for the promotion of D.S.P. Otherwise, the petitioner fulfils all the conditions need to be promoted. At this juncture of the arguments, the learned Advocate-General was asked by the Court to explain the legal aspects of the case that:--
(a) Which is the final authority, under the rules, to consider and to decide the promotion cases like the case in hand;
(b) Whether the final authority, under the rules, having no competency to promote any Officer unless the FMCC, issues clearance certificate to the officer; and.
(c) Whether, in past,. The Department or the competent authority had not considered and decided any case of the promotion unless FMCC cleared the case.
6. ' The questions (a) and (b) were answered by the learned Advocate-General as such, that the final authority, under rules, in the promotion case is the Chief Secretary, Northern Areas (respondent No,1) and he is well-competent to promote the Officer notwithstanding the FMCC disagrees with, while, the last question was answered by the Registrar of the Police Department as that no case of promotion, in past has been deferred, in his department on non-issuance of the clearance certificate by the FMCC and the eligible officers have been promoted despite the FMCC did not issue the clearance certificate to the officers. He also stated that, the post in question lying vacant till to day and no other officer has been promoted against the said post.
7. ' The learned Advocate-General also produced two letters before the Court. Letter No, SO(S)-1- 1(14)2002 has been issued by the then Chief Secretary Northern Areas to the FMCC, while the letter dated 29th October, 2002 has been written by the Lieutenant Colonel of the FMCC, for Director (Manzur Qadir), in reply to the above letter, which clears the ambiguity, if any in the mind of the respondent No,1 in this regard. The last lines of the letter written by the concerned officer of the FMCC are reproduced as under:-- "Formation, Monitoring and Coordination Cell only endorses the observations given by various intelligence agencies and final decision is left to be taken by your office. This office has never dictated its verdict."
8. ' The learned Advocate-General before parting with the arguments, raised a technical point, that this writ petition is not maintainable as the matter in issue does not come within the preview of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. He relied on the case-law laid down in 2001 PLC (C.S.)
157. The point was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner to meet the same. The learned counsel rebutted the point with the force of case-law cited as (i) PLD 2004 SC p.271 (ii) PLD 1978 Kar. p.703 and stated that, in past, several cases of like nature have been entertained by this Court. We are in consonance with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, this writ petition is well within the competency of this Court.
9. ' The upshot of the above discussion is that the respondent No,1 has deferred the promotion case of the petitioner without any cogent excuse and the "reason" relied by the learned Advocate-General before the Court, seems to be devoid of substance. Particularly, when the respondents 1 and 2 have conceded all the points raised by the petitioner, and also the queries made by the Court, ipso facto, the writ petition is hereby accepted and respondents Nos.1 and 2 are directed to promote the petitioner to the rank of D.S.P. (BPS-17) having resort to the procedure as provided in relevant law/rules. Copy of this order may be provided to Advocate-General, Northern Areas. No order as to costs.
10. ' File be consigned to record.