' S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-The appellant, Shabihur Raft, Sub-Inspector, Crime Branch, Lahore has filed an appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded the DSP, Finger Print Bureau, D.I.G., Crime Branch and the 1.-G..Police, Punjab, Lahore, as respondents. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the adverse remarks conveyed to him vide letters dated 10th December, 1977 (Annexures H & K) be expunged and the orders dated 23rd February, 1978, 26th April, 1978 and final order dated 22nd August, 1978 be set aside.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was working in the Finger Print Bureau and was communicated adverse remarks pertaining to the years 1974 and 1976 on 10th December, 1977, against which he made representation on 4th January, 1978, to the DIG for expunction of the same on the ground of enmity. The representation was rejected by the DIG on 23rd February, 1978. The appellant did not stop here and made a further representation to the IG Police for expunction of these adverse entries but the DIG himself rejected the same on 26th April, 1978 instead of forwarding the representation to the IG Police. The appellant appeared before the I G Police on 17th August, 1978 and requested that the case be forwarded to the competent authority for decision but his request was not acceded to vide order dated 22nd August, 1978. Hence this appeal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Government Pleader assisted by the departmental representative and have perused the entire record of this case carefully with their assistance. Before we enter into discussion on the subject matter it will be useful to reproduce the adverse entries made against the appellant in 1974 and 1976. The entry for the year 1974 is as under "Integrity.........Controversial"
' The adverse entries relating to the year 1976 are as below:- "Readiness to accept responsibility." Below average ' Readiness to expose subordinates, Below average ' Integrity 'Corrupt'
' Class of report. 'C'
'Indiscipline, corrupt and slur for Polite Department. Absolutely Unfit for this institution."
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the entry of 1974 is vague and ambiguous. According to him there was no incident or fact upon which the DSP had based his opinion except his malice and bias against the appellant. Similarly with regard to the remarks of 1976 given by the same officer, he has reiterated the same cause, i,e, the malice harboured by the said DSP. To prove the malice he has placed on record a document (Annex. A) Which is a complaint before the DIG Crime Branch in which the appellant has levelled a number of allegations of corruption, inefficiency and intrigues against his immediate superior? We also find on record the finding (Annex. B) Relating to an enquiry conducted against the appellant on the charge of misconduct/corruption. It was alleged against him that a civil suit was pending before Mr. Karmat Ali, Civil Judge, and Lyallpur against the appellant and that he had favoured and demanded illegal gratification of Rs, 5,000 and the bargain was ultimately struck at Rs, 3,000. One Iftikhar Ahmad who was interested in the result of the case in favour- of Nazar Hussain, one of the parties before the Civil Court, initially paid Rs, 500 and later on fulfilled his demand by paying Rs, 2,500 to the appellant in the presence of Muhammad Hussain and Nazir Ahrnad. An enquiry was conducted by PI Latif Akmal, Crime Branch, Lahore who concluded that the appellant was guilty of accepting illegal gratification from Iftikhar Ahmad by misusing his official position and power. He also recommended departmental action against the Inspector and the DSP on the charge of grave irregularity amounting to misconduct. In his opinion it was proved on the record that all the P Ws who happened to be the officials of the Finger Print Bureau unanimously stated that the DSP was inimical towards SI Shabihur Raza (the appellant). The SP Crime Branch vide his order dated 30th November, 1976 reduced the appellant to the rank of ASI with immediate effect. However, his appeal against the reversion before the DIG Crime Branch succeeded and the appellant was restored to the rank of S.I. It is also pertinent to note that in the decision of the DIG dated 23rd December, 1976 it has been observed as under :- "It is also in the evidence of witnesses that the DSP/FPB was bent upon to harm the appellant in one way or the other. The possibility that the appellant full a prey to the displeasure of the DSP/FPB cannot be ruled out."
' With this evidence on record we have no hesitation to conclude that the adverse remarks pertaining to the year 1976 are the result of enmity of the initiating authority, i,e,, DSP Muhammad Yaqoob (now retired). Thus these remarks are liable to be expunged. No order, or report or entry can be sustained if the same is based on malice and mala fide, We therefore, order expunction of the adverse remarks pertaining to the year 1976 against the appellant.
5. With regard to the remarks initiated in 1974 we do not find that there is any material on the record to show that before this year there was any bad blood existing between the DSP and the appellant. The appellant has, of course, made allegations in the memorandum of his appeal regarding bad relations with his DSP but there is nothing on the record ' to substantiate the same.
In view of the above we do not feel any justification to order the expunction of the remarks for the year 1974.
' The result is that the appeal is partially accepted with regard to the adverse entries pertaining to the year, 1976 and partially dismissed in respect of the entry for the year, 1974.