JUDGMENT IJAZ AHMAD, J.---The parawise comments sought from the respondents have been submitted. The petitioners opt not to submit any rejoinder to the parawise comments.
2. This single judgment will dispose of Writ Petition No.3417 of 2011, Writ Petition No.4048 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 3491 of 2011 and Writ Petition No.3487 of 2011. Through the first three petitions, the order dated 16-3-2011 passed by the DPO, Dera Ghazi Khan has been challenged which contains a list of 28 constables who have been selected and transferred to the Punjab Constabulary, Farooqabad on deputation for a period of three years. In the last petition a similar order dated 16-3-2011, containing the names of 36 constables passed by the DPO, Rajanpur, selected and transferred to the Punjab Constabulary, has been challenged. The parties are ready to advance the arguments, these cases are admitted to a regular hearing and will be treated as `Pakka' cases.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the orders have been passed on the basis of the police rules carried in the Standing Order dated 9/2001 and are also based on the direction contained in I.G. Police, Punjab Office memo dated 4-5-2009 wherein it has been provided that the order in seniority would be strictly followed, but while passing the impugned orders, the order of seniority has been ignored altogether. Some of the petitioners who rank in the lowest order of the seniority have been deputed for serving The Punjab Constabulary; that some of the petitioners have been selected and deputed with the intent of persecution on account of some earlier writ petitions filed by the petitioners. The respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.3417 of 2011 nurses grudge against them and many of the constables who are senior to the petitioners have not been deputed to the Constabulary and have been allowed to rest in the cozy seats of the offices; that in fact the deputation to the Punjab Constabulary was schemed to allow the constables who had not passed the departmental examination or who suffered from any other shortcomings, a chance to improve themselves. Learned counsel refer to a letter dated 4-1-2011 issued by the I.G. Police Punjab, Lahore to all the RPOs in Punjab, wherein it has been stipulated that the deputation of the constables to the Punjab Constabulary is regulated by the standing order 9/2001 wherein it is provided that the rotation to the Punjab Constabulary would be made purely on the principle of seniority and through this letter, the frequent violation of the seniority principle is looked down upon. He also relies on the judgment dated 15-4-2010 passed Writ Petition No.1838 of 2010 wherein the sending of the younger constables in seniority was held to be a novel method; some of the constables whose names appeared at the bottom of the list were ordered to be replaced by those whose were ripe for deputation. It is lastly argued that the selection and deputation with an intent to persecute the unfavourite constables and to save the favourites from the rigors of the training is not sanctioned by law.
4. Mr. Muhammad Ameer Bhatti, Advocate the learned counsel for the petitioners, appearing in Writ Petition No.3487 of 2011 lays further emphasis on The contents of Standing Order 9, 2001 to argue that the appointment in the Punjab Constabulary shall be made in the rank of constables. In making the selection for recruitment, it shall be ensured that it should be made from the districts according to their shares. He argues that the recruitment has not been made by the Selection Board itself and rather has been made by the DPOs, which is not warranted by law.
5. On the other hand, it is argued by the learned A.A.-G. Assisted By Abdul Raheem Inspector, that the Punjab Constabulary is a special force meant to ensure the law and order situation; that every constable has to serve the Punjab Constabulary on deputation, for a period of three years on his turn; that recruitment to Punjab Constabulary and transfer on deputation of the constables are two distinct notions. In the instant case, the petitioners are being transferred on deputation and this B transfer on deputation cannot be I a gyred as recruitment, therefore, the Selection Board does not come into play; that at times as per the policy of the Inspector General of Police Punjab, some newly appointed constables have also been sent to serve the Punjab Constabulary on deputation; that in any case, 37 years age is considered to be the optimum age for sending the constables on deputation; that from the batch recruited in the year 2006 from which all the petitioners hail, 52 constables have been deputed to Punjab Constabulary from D.G. Khan District on three occasions.
The discrimination alleged by the petitioners is not well founded.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned A.A.-G.
7. The first point to be determined is whether the constables are sent on deputation to the Punjab Constabulary as a privilege,' as a punishment or as a part of their employment. It is neither a punishment nor a privilege. It is a special training that every constable has to undergo. It helps the constables to do away with their shortcomings and to improve their capabilities. No one can escape it. The age around 37 years of a constable, seems to have been fixed keeping in view the maturity required for action and conception that a constable would have attained by that time and the natural process of aging would have not' by then set in. A suckling constable lacks the maturity and capability. A constable close to superannuation would have already started refusing to understand and grasp the new ideas. Since there is no escape from this training, it should be endured like a gentleman and enjoyed like a sportsman. The respondents/DPOs shall shun the style of pick and choose and the remote desire to persecute the un favoured should be fare- welled.
8. Instead of deleting the names of some specific youngsters and picking the names of the substitutes from the list of seniority maintained by the office of the DPOs, I would like to refer the matter to the concerned DPOs. They shall delete the names of the saplings from the list of proposed deputes. They shall be substituted by those, whom the deputation to Punjab Constabulary is due on seniority-cumfitnes basis. I know, the respondents/DPOs will come to my expectations that they will adhere to the policy and law by preparing a new list while dealing with the matter. These petitions stand accepted and disposed of in terms of the observations made above.