' ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J.---This appeal by the leave of this Court vide order dated 7-2-2006 assails the judgment dated 22-11-2005 in Writ Petition No,2451 of 2003 passed by a learned single Judge in chambers of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, whereby, the claim of respondent for his out of turn promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police was sustained and consequently said petition was allowed with directions to the petitioners to 'issue formal notification of his promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police.
2. Briefly stated, relevant facts forming background of this litigation are that on 11-6-2003, respondent Sardar Zafar Iqbal Dogar, who was inducted in the service of Punjab Police as ASI on 11- 6-1988, invoked the jurisdiction of Lahore High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, by filing writ petition referred to above, for seeking following relief:-- "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the writ petition may kindly be accepted and an appropriate writ/direction may very graciously be issued to the respondents to comply with their own recommendations and orders and the same be kindly ordered to be implemented for one step promotion of the petitioner to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police from the date of orders passed by the competent authorities."
3. In the said petition, the respondent had given details of his extraordinary efficiency, dedication and instances of gallantry performance in combating terrorism in the area where he remained posted and also as member of special task force formed to curb sectarian terrorism, which, according to him, in terms of section 8-A of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 (VIII of 1974) and the rules framed thereunder, made him entitled for such out of turn promotion, as was done in the case of a number of Police Constables as well as two of his colleagues Inspector Ejaz Shafi and Inspector Naveed Akram, who were promoted to the ranks of Head Constables and DSPs respectively. In this . Regard further case of the petitioner was that he was subjected to discrimination and thus his fundamental rights, guaranteed under Article 25. Of the Constitution were also violated in that process.
4 . In their reply. To the averments" made by the respondent is his writ petition before the Lahore High Court, such factual aspects of the case were not disputed by any of the petitioners, but it was clarified that due to recent out of turn promotion of the respondent to the rank of Inspector on 13- 8-2002, again on the basis of recommendation dated 29-8-2002 by the D.I.-G. Multan Range, which was made just after two weeks of his earlier promotion, he was not found fit for another out of turn promotion to the rank of DSP. However, looking to his service record and performance, other financial benefits etc. Were awarded to him.
5. Before the Lahore High Court, case was argued at length, whereafter, taking into consideration the meritorious and gallantry performance of respondent, particularly against the sectarian terrorism in Multan Range, and the scope of section 8-A of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974, learned single Judge in Lahore High Court found him entitled for yet another out of turn promotion as he also succeeded to make out a case of discrimination, when compared to the. Case of his two other colleagues Inspector Ejaz Shafi and Naveed Akram, who were promoted to the rank of DSP.
Accordingly; the writ petition was allowed and requisite relief was granted to the petitioner.
6. Mr. Mudassar Khalid Abbasi, learned Assistant Advocate-General 'Punjab vigorously argued this appeal and contended that for the purpose of promotion from the rank of Sub-Inspector to Inspector w,e,f, 13-8-2002, the respondent was already awarded out of turn promotion as contemplated under section 8-A of the Act of 1974, therefore, his request for second time out of turn promotion on the basis of recommendation of D.I.-G. Multan Range dated 29-8-2002, within a short span of two weeks was totally unjustified. Moreso, as at the relevant time respondent was also not eligible to hold the office of DSP in the 'Punjab Police services due to lack of two qualifications regarding his length of seven years service in the rank of confirmed Inspector and passing of mandatory specialized training course for Inspectors, both. Envisaged in the Notification No, SOR.III.1-17/90 dated 19th December, 2001. To fortify his submissions, learned A.A.-G. Punjab placed reliance on a recent reported case of this Court in Muhammad Nadeem Arif v. I.-G. Of Police (2010 PLC .(C.S.) 924 = 2011 SCMR 408) wherein, while addressing the point of out of turn promotions in Police Services of Punjab, such practice was disapproved, and in this context following observations were made:-- " ..The Government officers are like public trust and, therefore, the same should be regulated in fair, transparent and economically so as to promote the sense of public service and thereby to -make a welfare State. The public offices should not be held for improper motives. The social justice and economic justice can also be done through fair administrative policies. No policy can be congenial if it breeds corruption. Out of turn promotion, as envisaged in the impugned instruction, is not only against Constitution but also against Injunctions of Islam. Out of turn promotion in a public department generates frustration and thereby diminishes the spirit of public service. It generates undue preference in a public service. Element of reward and award is good to install the spirit of service of community but it should not be made basis of accelerated promotion. Let copy of this order be sent to all the Provincial Police Officers and Islamabad Capital City Police Officer to look into the matter and frame rules to save the agony of police officials/officers as well as to save the public exchequer from unnecessary litigation."
7. Conversely, Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the respondent contended that the earlier out of turn promotion of respondent to the post of Inspector w,e,f, 13-8- 2002, looking to his seniority as Sub-Inspector was already treated as his promotion with retrospective effect from 22-10-1997, thus question of lack of qualification of required length of service as Inspector raised by the petitioners was ill-founded. At this juncture he did not address the Court on the point of other .Disqualification, as regards specialized training course, but insisted that the case of other two Police officers, who were promoted to the rank of DSP's was in all respects identical to the case of present respondent and thus the provisions of Article 25 of the Constitution were violated, and in such circumstances respondent was fully justified in invoking the writ jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. Learned Advocate Supreme Court further did not controvert that the requirement of recommendation by the Provincial Selection Board in terms of Rule 14-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 relating to out of turn promotion was not fulfilled nor in turn the approval was accorded by the competent authority. Faced with tins situation, he submitted that in order to seek complete justice, respondent will be satisfied with the disposal of this petition in the terms that the impugned judgment passed by the Lahore High Court may be set aside, but his case may be sent back to the Provincial Selection Board in line with the judgment of this Court in the case of Government of Punjab v. Raja Muhammad Iqbal (1993 SCMR 1814), wherein in somewhat identical circumstances, while examining the issue of out of turn promotion, the case was remitted to the Provincial Selection Board for fresh decision in accordance with law, keeping in view certain observations made in the said judgment.
8. A careful perusal of case record made available in this appeal reveals that the case of the respondent about his gallantry and outstanding performance was duly appreciated by the concerned quarters, therefore, in the first instance, petitioner was promoted out of turn from the rank of Sub-Inspector to the rank of Inspector w,e,f, 13-8-2002, with certain conditions, which enabled him to supersede a large number of other Sub-Inspectors, who were, otherwise, much senior to him in the seniority list. Later on, his performance was further appreciated in other anti- terrorist operations, but this time, it was found that yet another out of turn promotion to him to the next rank of DSP would be premature, therefore, keeping in view his gallantry performance, he was granted some other benefits/rewards such as commendation certificate by Governor Punjab, cash prize of Rs,.100,000, Gallantry Medal (Pakistan Police Medal) coupled with rupees two lass as per notification dated 15-10-2002. The respondent, however, did not Consider such rewards/ benefits sufficient for his gallantry and outstanding performance, inter alia, for the reasons that before his promotion to the rank of Inspector he was a senior Sub-Inspector, thus, otherwise due for promotion on turn, and 'his two other colleague Inspectors who had participated in the same action against terrorist activities, namely Ejaz Shari and Naveed Akram were given the benefit of section 8-A of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 read with rule 14-A of the Punjab-Civil Servants (Appoint and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974, by way of their out of turn promotion to the rank of DSP.
9. Keeping in view-the above noted undisputed facts of the case the Lahore High Court through its impugned judgment, granted requisite relief to the respondent, however, while doing so, it failed to take notice of some other important legal aspects of the case that it was the domain of Provincial Selection Board to examine each case of out of turn promotion of officers of BPS-17 and above in terms of section 8-A of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 and Rules of 1974,framed thereunder, on case to case basis but such procedure was not followed in the case of respondent. Further his out of turn promotion to the rank of DSP, inter alia, required fulfilment of qualifications as per Notification No,SOR 111-1-17/20 dated 19-12-2001 and approval from the competent authority, which were also lacking. In our opinion, such mandatory requirements of law could not have been done away by the Lahore, High Court in the manner as has been done in the instant case. Similarly, the plea of discrimination premised on Article 25 of the Constitution, looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, has no force to justify the claim of respondent for his out of turn promotion, as one or any number of wrongful actions/favours, if any, cannot be made basis to justify further wrongs on the plea of equal treatment or nondiscrimination, which can be, otherwise, challenged separately before sonic proper forum.
10. Indeed, acceptance of last submission of the learned counsel for the respondent for sending the case of respondent back to the Provincial Selection Board in line with the judgment of this Court in the case of Government of Punjab (supra) might have been a proposal, worth consideration for the disposal of writ petition by Lahore High Court to redress the grievance of the respondent at that time However, now after lapse of more than five years when much water has passed under the bridge, keeping in view the fact that in the meantime the said provision of law section 8-A (ibid) has been omitted with effect from 17-10-2006 and subject to fulfilment of other qualifications, fresh exercise before the Provincial Selection Board, which may result in superseding many other senior Police officers, in the rank of Inspector, will be against the norms of justice, fairplay and will perpetuate injustice, we are not inclined to follow such suggested course. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed, impugned judgment of the Lahore High Court is set aside and writ petition filed by the respondent is dismissed.