S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-Muhammad Pervez Akhtar, Sub-Inspector has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded D. I.-G. Police Rawalpindi Range, Rawalpindi and L-G. Police Punjab, Lahore, as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the respondents be directed to consider the appellant's case for promotion to List "F" and as Inspector of Police w. e.
1. 20th July, 1980, the date from which his junior has been promoted.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was posted at Police College, Sihala as Law Instructor in January, 1975. Due to his unblemished record of service and good performance he was given one step promotion on 3rd April, 1979. The appellant's name was not included in List "F". The appellant submitted his representation, dated 20th July. 1980 to respondent No, 2 but no order has so far been passed on the said representation. In that representation the appellant has agitated that his promotion has been ignored due to some misunderstanding that he did not have the experience of bolding charge of a Ist class Police Station. Hence this appeal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has. Argued that according to the Policy of the Department as contained in their letter, dated 14th December, 1977 the tenure of the appellant at Police College Sihala was treated at par with the bolding of charge of Police Station of 1st Class importance for the purpose of seniority and promotion to List "F". It has been urged that the case of the appellant was duly recommended for promotion of List F in August, 1980 by the Commandant, Police College, Sihala, whose rank is that of D. I.-G. The appellant has also cited examples of certain cases of M is.
J. Samnal Malik Liaquat, Sikandar Niazi, Zakar Hussain Shah and Ch. Muhammad Iqbal as precedents and has submitted that he has been discriminated for wrong interpretation of the Departmental Policy as contained in the letter so mentioned above.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. The case of the appellant was admitted to regular hearing on the strength of allegation that the respondents have failed to consider his stay at Sihala Police College as Law Instructor equivalent to the holding of charge of 1st Class Police Station. The perusal of the record reveals that appellant was ignored for List "F" by the I.-G. Police vide his order, dated 20th July, 1980 on the ground that he had indifferent record, particularly regarding integrity, described `Doubtful' for the years 1969, 1972 and 'Not known' for the years 1978 and 1979. It was further found that the appellant throughout his entire service had only 4 months experience of investigation, therefore, he was not considered fit to be brought on List "F".
The I.-G. Police in his order made it clear to the appellant that if at all he was interested in his promotion, he would have to leave P. T. C. Sihala and gain experience as S. H.
0. Because he had virtually no experience as Investigating Officer, muchless as S. H.
0.
6. In view of the above it cannot be said that the appellant has been ignored only on the ground that he did not hold the charge of first class Police Station and thus the policy letter has been misinterpreted. The perusal of the order of the I.-G. P. Has cleared this ambiguity and the fact is now established that the appellant was ignored for List "F" after he was interviewed by the I.-G.
Police, who considered his case and found him unsuitable.
7. The law on this point has been settled that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to interfere in matters of promotion when it is found that the same has been refused on justified grounds by the authority, competent to promote his official.
8. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the well-considered order of the I.-G. Police Punjab and dismiss the appeal as being without any merits. However the parties will bear their own costs.