' S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-The appellant, Syed Latif Hussain Shah, is a Constable in the Police Department. He is aggrieved by the fact that he has been reverted from the post of Head Constable without being given the opportunity to explain his conduct and to defend himself. The reversion was ordered by the D. L-G. Police, Lahore Range, vide order issued on 4th May, 1978. By this order the D. I.-G. Also removed the appellant's name from list C-1. On representation the D.I.-G.
Upheld the order of 21st May, 1978 and reject=ted the representation on 25th November, 1980.
2. The parties were heard. The appellant contended that he could only be reverted as a result of proceedings under the Police E & D Rules, but no such proceedings were taken, nor any proper enquiry held into the charge of consorting with anti-social elements and deriving financial benefits from them, Moreover, no show-cause notice was served on him and the penalty was imposed arbitrarily and unjustly and without affording him any opportunity to present his side of the case.
The argument made on behalf of the respondents was that the appellant was officiating Head Constable and under the Rules he could be reverted any time without notice. There was no call to issue any show-cause notice to the appellant in this behalf. The performance of the appellant which led to his reversion was hardly expected from a member of a disciplined force like the public when the public looked up to for exemplary behaviour.
3. We have seen the record. The reversion of the appellant is provided by the rules and no exception can be taken to it. He was officiating Head Constable and could be reverted as Constable without notice. The appeal is not sustainable and is, therefore, dismissed in limine.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant further observed that ever since his reversion the appellant had been giving satisfactory service and his work had even been commended on various occasions. He produced some documents in support of this assertion. We have seen these certificates. All that we can do is to recommend to the respondents that if the appellant has given no further cause for complaint by his behavior and performance after his reversion the case for re- inclusion of his name in list C-1 may be favourably considered.