SARDAR ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--M/s. Muhammad Ameer Abdullah Khan. Inspector of Police No.M-92, SHO, Police Station, Chichawatni, district Sahiwal, Altaf Ahmad, Inspector Police No.1/61, PS, Race Course Road, Lahore, Pervaiz Shah (Pervaiz Kandhari), Inspector Police No.S/137, Police Station, Nawan Kot, Lahore, and Nizam Shahid, No. DG/12, Inspector Police SHO, Shahdara, Lahore, have filed these appeals a/s 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which all the appellants have impleaded the Inspector-General of Police, Lahore, as respondent.
2. By virtue of these appeals the appellants have prayed that the impugned orders dated 24-12- 1985, be set aside and orders dated 27-5-1985 (Muhammad Amir Abdullah Khan), dated 7-3-1985 (Altaf Ahmad), dated 18-2-1985 (Pervaiz Shah), dated 25-3-1985 (Nizam Shahid) whereby the appellants were confirmed in the rank of Inspectors be restored. They have further prayed that directions be issued to this effect, that the appellants case for admission to List 'G' and promotion as D.S.Ps. From the date from which they became due on the basis of their confirmation as Inspectors be taken up and decided on merits.
3. As the law point as well as facts involved in all these four appeals are identical in nature, therefore, we will decide all these appeals with our this single judgment.
4. Brief facts of the case are as under:- Muhammad Ameer Abdullah Khan, Inspector Police: The appellant joined service as a Food Constable in the Punjab Police Department in the year 1963.
By his excellent conduct and performance he earned promotions at due time and even accelerated one and was eventually promoted as Assistant Sub-Inspector in 1975, after having successfully completed his Inter Class Course, 1974. He was further promoted as Sub-Inspector in January, 1980, whereafter he once again successfully completed his Upper Class Course at Sihala in the year 1982. In the year 1983, the appellant was posted as SHO, Ghaziabad, District Sahiwal, when a dacoity was committed by armed dacoits in the jurisdiction of PS Shah Kot, District Sahiwal, and during the said occurrence the Gunman and Manager of the Bank were inflicted gunshot wounds by them. The dacoits decamped. Later, the appellant arrested 5 out of 6 dacoits and recovered from them the weapons of offence i.e. Stenguns. For this meritorious service the appellant's case was recommended to the Inspector-General of Police by the SP Sahiwal for a cash reward of Rs.5,000 and besides that for promotion as Inspector and for the placing of his name in the 'F' List. Later on when the case was still under consideration of the Respondent, the appellant found another occasions to give much better account of his exceptional performance as a Police Officer and in that he arrested in all 7 desperate accused, who had acquired Province were notoriety by the time the appellant was entrusted with the task of arresting them without loss of time. In quite a dramatic way, while heading a police party, which included his senior officers also the appellant arrested these desperados from Kasur Railway Station, when they were about to cross over to India. In recognition of these highly meritorious services, which he performed once again within a short span of time, the Respondent not only gave a reward of Rs.5,000 to the appellant but at the same time was pleased to place his name on List 'F'. The appellant was promoted as Inspector on or about 31-12-1984. On 25-4-1985 the appellant was posted as Inspector, SHO, PS Dera Rahim, District Sahiwal, when he received the secret information, that some dacoits of desperate character, who had committed dacoities in a number of districts, including Vehari.
5. Altaf Ahmed, Inspector Police: He joined service in the Police Force as ASI on 3-9-1966. Due to his excellent work and conduct appellant was admitted to List 'E' and was promoted as Sub-Inspector with effect from 1-6-1971. By order dated 20-7-1980, appellant was admitted to List 'F' w.e.f. 20-7-1980 due to his consistently good record of service, and was posted as Inspector w.e.f. 22-7-1980. The appellant has rendered meritorious and gallantry service since his joining the Police Force and in recognition of such service, he was awarded a large number of 1st Class and 2nd Class commendation Certificates alongwith cash rewards. There are 33 good entries in his Service record. Most of the commendation certificates were awarded to the appellant for showing extraordinary performances, arrest of dangerous POS, smashing of Gundas. In the years 1983 & 1984 appellant's performances as Inspector/SHO, PS Naulakha, Lahore, were quite extraordinary and unprecedented. The appellant arrested a large number of dangerous POS who were wanted by Police in large number of cases.
He smashed a number of criminal gangs and effected recovery of huge deal of stolen property.
Due to his extraordinary, unexceptional and unprecedented performances the S.P. City Division, Lahore, submitted recommendation Roll on Form No.15(7)2 on the basis of his performance to the D.I.-G. Police Lahore Range, Lahore, who also endorsed the recommendations of S.P. And recommended out of turn confirmation of the appellant as Inspector. The Inspector-General of Police accepted the recommendations of S.P. And DIG Police, Lahore and confirmed the appellant as Inspector w.e.f. 7-3-1985, in relaxation of relevant rules, in recognition of his commendable performance in unearthing gangs of criminals, by his order dated 7-3-1985. On the basis of appellant's confirmation w.e.f. 7-3-1985 and the seniority earned by him on that basis appellant became due for admission to select List 'G' and for promotion as DSP. However, his case was placed before the D.P.C. And was deferred for want of ACRs. Thereafter, the Inspector---General of Police, Punjab, by impugned order dated 24-12-1985, has de-confirmed the said order without assigning any reason and Show Cause Notice. Hence this appeal.
6. Pervaiz Shah (Pervaiz Kandhari) :Inspector Police, The appellant joined service as ASI on 2-4-1971. Due to his excellent work and conduct appellant was admitted to list 'E' and was promoted as Sub-Inspector w.e.f. 1-10-1975. By order dated 13-2- 1983, appellant was admitted to List 'F' w.e.f. 8-2-1983, due to his consistently good record of service.
Due to meritorious and gallantry service rendered by the appellant and in recognition of such service appellant was awarded a large number of 1st Class and 2nd Class Commendation Certificates alongwith Cash rewards. There are 68 good entries in his service record. The cash rewards so far received by the appellant come to Rs.20,000, and most of the Commendation Certificates were awarded to him for showing extraordinary performance, arrest of dangerous POS, smashing of Gundas, etc. He was deputed for Upper Class Course to P.T.C. Sihala in the year 1979, where he secured all round first position by dint of his hardwork and also first position in all the subjects of the said course. In the years 1983 and 1984, appellant's performance as Inspector/SHO, PS Misri Shah, Lahore, were quite extraordinary and unprecedented. He arrested a large number of dangerous POS who were wanted by Police in a large number of cases. The appellant smashed criminal gangs. The Authorities were so much impressed by appellant's extraordinary, exceptional and unprecedented performances that S.P. City Division, Lahore, submitted recommendation Roll- on Form No.15(7)2, as under:- "A gang operating inter-Province and comprising Hassan, Muhammad Ashraf, Masood Anwar, Ejaz, Rafaqat, Haji Nazir and Muhammad Yousaf desperate and hardened criminals involved in a large number of cases against person and property of different Police Stations was smashed by the Officer. The above named criminals on their arrests disclosed 89 jewellery and other shops burglary cases, the details of which are given below: Punjab/62, Sind/6, NWFP/11, Azad Kashmir and Northern Area/5 and Foreign Countries/5.
The above gang was also involved in the famous burglary case of Sooter Mandi, Faisalabad involving loss of Rs.4 lacs.
On 6-11-1984 two armed persons robbed one Muhammad Younis of Prize Bonds worth Rs.6 lacs and cash of Rs.1,50,000 while he was on his way to State Bank of Pakistan on pistol point. It was a complicated case and visibly there was no clue of the accused or the stolen property but the appellant put in his best and worked out the case due to his mobility, hard work and alertness. Both accused were arrested after blocking all the chances of their escape abroad. For this purpose all the International Airports were manned by plain clothes staff. The stolen property was recovered at the instance of accused person. Both the accused were notorious criminals wanted in a large number of cases. The accused persons were found the members of a gang operating in different parts of Punjab and Sind. Their associates were arrested on the basis of information collected during the interrogation of the accused by the officer.
On the night falling between 22/23-11-1984, burglary was committed in jewellery shop of Sua Bazar, Lahore and as a result thereof the culprits took away 1400 tolas gold ornaments from the shop. Gas cutters were used to cut the doors and lockers. Investigation of the case was entrusted to the officer who deployed all available sources to trace out the culprits and due to his concerted efforts succeeded in apprehending the accused and recovering the stolen property. Undoubtedly this was the great success."
The DIG Police, Lahore Range endorsed the recommendations of S.P. And recommended, out of turn confirmation of appellant in his present rank as Inspector as a special case. The learned Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, accepted the recommendations of S.P. And DIG Police, Lahore and confirmed the appellant as Inspector w.e.f. 11-2-1985, in relaxation of relevant rules and in recognition of his commendable performances in unearthing gangs of criminals. Thereafter, the appellant was posted as Inspector at PS Gulberg, Lahore and took active part in arresting four dangerous criminals who had committed a burglary in the Car of the 'PEPSI .COLA'. The appellant also assisted DSP Gulberg, Lahore in seizing two maunds gold worth Rupees 1.50 crore. Appellant's services in this respect were appreciated vide news to this effect which was published in Daily Jang on 25-7-1985. On the basis of appellant's confirmation w.e.f. 11-2-1985, and the seniority earned by him on that basis he became due for admission to select List 'G' and for promotion as DSP.
Consequently the case of the appellant alongwith four others was placed before the DPC held on 7-3-1985, which was deferred for want of ACRs. However, the Inspector-General of Police, Punjab by impugned order dated 24-12-1985, has de-confirmed the said order without assigning any reasons and show-cause notice. Hence, this appeal.
7. Nizam Shahid, Inspector Police: The appellant joined service as ASI on 15-3-1971. Due to his excellent work and conduct, he was admitted to List 'E' and was promoted as Sub-Inspector w.e.f. 3-8-1976. The appellant was admitted to List 'F' w.e.f. 15-9-1983, due to his consistently good record of service. The appellant has rendered meritorious and gallantry service and in recognition of such service, he was awarded a large number of 1st Class and 2nd Class Commendation Certificates alongwith cash reward. There exists 87 good entries in his service record. The cash rewards received by appellant comes to Rs.39,000.
Most of the commendation certificates placed on record, were awarded to the appellant for showing extraordinary performances, arrest of dangerous POS, smashing of Gundas etc. In the years 1983 and 1984 appellant's performances as Inspector/SHO, Badami Bagh, Lahore, were quite extraordinary and unprecedented. He was successful in unearthing a large number of gangs of dangerous criminals who were wanted by Police in large number of cases. The S.P. City Division, Lahore, submitted Recommendation Roll on form No.15(7)2 to the DIG, Lahore Range, Lahore, as under:- "Inspector Nizam Shahid No.DG/12 SHO Badami Bagh is a young and energetic officer who has managed the affairs of his area most satisfactorily. During his posting of about 15 months he has unearthed not less than 5 gangs of desperados involving recovery of huge property. This had a healthy effect over the rising trend of crime in the City of Lahore. The criminals apprehended by this officer, were notorious for their inter---district operations because they had let loose the reign of terror.
The details of the gangs smashed by this officer are summed up as follows:-
(1) This gang of cattle lifters which was headed by Rehmat consisted of Muhammad Ashraf alias Labha son of Fazal Din Gujjar, Labha son of Kaula Bakhsh and Mushtaq @ Kaka, all resident of Lahore. They were found involved in no less than 7 cases falling a/s. 380/457, 397/411 and 411/PPC.
(2) This gang of thieves consisted of 3 criminals namely, Khan Muhammad alias Khanoon, Pannu s/o Khushi Muhammad and Bakhoo himself, all resident of Jhuggian Railway Station, Badami Bagh, Lahore. They used to commit burglaries /thefts in bungalows involving losses of T.V., Tap Recorders, Cameras, Watches and Clothes etc. They were found responsible for the commission of less than 15 cases falling u/s 379/411 and 411, PPC. Recoveries effected from them ranged very high.
(3) This gang consisted of 4 criminals namely, Asif s/o Bashir Ahmad, Younis son of Haroon Khan, Ghaffar alias Bholoo sons of Bundo and Rashid Ali himself, all residents of Lahore. They were known thieves who were involved in not less than 16 cases under the Arms Ordinance, and theft of property. Recoveries from the gang were worth lacs.
(4) This gang consisted of 9 criminals, namely, Bashir son of Bagh Ali, Ahmad son of Ishaq, Arif and Muhammad Hussain sons of Sadiq. Muhammad Hussain and Hassan Ali s/o Inayat, Muhammad Anwar s/o Shahadat, Haider Ali s/o Sardara and Rehmat son of Ishaq. They were known as "NANGA DACOITS" who belonged to known criminal 'Oad Tribe". On interrogation they disclosed the commission of no less than 66 cases relating to the Districts of Rahimyar Khan, Bahawalpur, Sheikhupura, Gujranwala, Sahiwal and Faisalabad.
(5) This gang comprised Manzoor @ Joora, Siddique @ Rafique, Bagh Ali @ Bagha and Boota son of Ghulam Hussain, all Faqeers by caste and residents of Nangal Doona Singhwala, District Gujranwala. They used to commit dacoities of Motor Cycles, Petrol Pumps and other robberies/ burglaries into the districts of Lahore, Sheikhupura and Gujranwala. Large quantity of ammunition was recovered on their arrest. They also disclosed the commission of no less than 33 dacoities robberies /burglaries involving property worth lacs. They were arrested after an encounter by the Police.
(6) He was also member of Investigation Team of famous Sooha Bazar, burgulary case (FIR No.153 dated 24-11-1984 a/s. 457/380, PPC PS Mochi Gate). He had put in concerted efforts for the tracing out of criminals involved in the aforesaid case.
The SSP/DIG Police, Lahore Range, Lahore, also endorsed the recommendations of SP and recommended out of turn confirmation of appellant in his present rank as Inspector as a special case. The Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, accepted the recommendations of S.P./SSP/DIG Police, Lahore and confirmed the appellant as Inspector w.e.f. 25-3-1985, in relaxation of relevant rules and in recognition of his commendable performances in unearthing no less than 5 gangs of desperados involving recovery of huge property. On the basis of appellant's confirmation w.e.f. 25- 3-1985 and the seniority earned by him on that basis, he became due for admission to select list 'G' and for promotion as D.S.P. The case was taken up and it was placed before the DPC, which was deferred for want of ACRs. Thereafter, by impugned order dated 24-12-1985, the appellant has been de-confirmed and reduced as Officiating Inspector. Hence, this appeal.
8. We have heard Ch. Muhammad Aslam Virk, Learned Counsel for Muhammad Amir Abdullah Khan and Mr. Masud Ahmad Riaz, counsel appearing on behalf of other appellants and also heard the learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.
9. Learned Counsel for the appellants have urged that conception of out of turn confirmation /promotion was fully consistent with age old practice prevailing in the Police Department, therefore, the earlier orders of the learned Inspector-General of Police Punjab, by which these appellants stood confirmed, were fully in order as the same were issued in relaxation of rules. It has been vehemently argued that this power fully- vested in the Inspector-General of Police, who conferred the said confirmation on these appellants due to their extraordinary and meritorious services under rule 13.20 of Police Rules, 1934. It has been further submitted that once confirmation has been so conferred upon the appellants in accordance with the said Rules quoted above, the successor of the said learned Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, could not pass the impugned orders without assigning any cogent reason and without show-cause notice in the name of the appellants. It has been further submitted that their confirmation could only be withdrawn only under the Police (E & D) Rules and by way of punishment and by no other manner. For this they have relied on 1980 PLC (CS) 493 Muhammad Ayub Khan v. I.-G. Police, Punjab, 1982 PLC (CS)
443--Ch. Abdul Qayyum v. Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, Lahore PLD 1985 SC 159, I.-G. Police v. Arshad Hussain Shah and Mushtaq Ahmad Warriach and 1981 SCMR 523, Raja Muhammad Nawaz v. Government. According to the learned counsel for the appellants the law laid down in the judgments so indicated above, is on all fours and fully applicable to the case of the appellants and thus on the strength of aforesaid judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan & the Punjab Service Tribunal, the impugned orders could not be sustained.
10. With regard to the case of Raja Muhammad Nawaz it has been submitted that their lordships of the Supreme Court of Pakistan has clearly laid down that once the order has become effective and acted upon, no locus poenitentiae and animus revertendi is left with the Authority to rescind the same, even if it is found that the order was passed erroneously.
11. On the other hand learned District Attorney has submitted that Government has powers a/s. 21 of the General Clauses Act to rescind the order which had been passed by his predecessor. He has adopted the comments of the Department and has submitted that by confirmation of these appellants, rights of lot of senior officers have been disturbed and they have been superseded without any fault of theirs.
12. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments advance by the parties and find that the earlier orders passed in favour of the appellants were well-considered orders, duly issued on the recommendations of their superiors on the strength of their extraordinary and highly meritorious performance and by relaxation of Rule 13.18 of the Police Rules, therefore, it cannot be said that earlier orders of confirmation were in any manner arbitrary and without application of mind and passed in contravention of the mandatory provisions of any law or rules in this regard. We will refer the earlier confirmation orders in their favour which is placed as Annexure "C" in case of Muhammad Amir Abdullah Khan, which is dated 27-5-1985, which runs as under:- "Inspector of Police Muhammad Amir Abdullah Khan, No.M/92 is hereby confirmed in his rank w.e.f.
22-5-1985 as a special case, in relaxation of relevant rules, in recognition of his commendable performance in apprehending a notorious desperado namely, Muhammad Rafiq at the great risk of his life as recommended by DIG/Multan Range."
On confirmation he is allotted Provincial No.G/189."
All orders in respect of M/s. Altaf Ahmad, Pervaiz Shah and Nizam Shahid, Inspectors of Police, are similar in nature and clearly exhibit the independent application of mind of the competent authority while passing the said orders. A case of similar nature came before this Tribunal--titled Muhammad Ayub Khan v. I.-G. Police Punjab, reported as 1980 PLC (C . S.) 493, in which this Tribunal after recounting the events of the said case, which are absolutely similar to the case of the appellants, found that the orders of confirmation were first passed but later on rescinded on the ground that the said appellant was too junior in the rank of Inspector and should not have been confirmed as such. We also noted down the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant in the aforesaid case wherein he claimed that he was not served with any show-cause notice before withdrawing the confirmation order, which had been fully acted upon and the appellant had acquired the status of Inspector. Learned Tribunal also reproduced the contention of Government Pleader, wherein it was said that the recommendations had wrongly been made and the learned Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, has the powers to withdraw the same under the Punjab Police Rules according to which it was necessary that before confirmation every Police Officer has to be promoted in the first instance, on probation for a period of two years, whereas the appellants had been officiating and they were never put on probation and there was no other provision for making the confirmation of the appellants in the rank of Inspectors. After hearing both the parties the learned Tribunal concluded as under:- "In the first instance, the confirmation order had taken effect and the same could not be withdrawn except as a punishment. We agree with the appellant that there was no power left with the Departmental 'Authorities to withdraw the confirmation after the order had taken the legal effect.
The Department has also failed to rebut the contention of the appellant that in quite a few cases the similar treatment has been meted out to other incumbents in whose cases the orders were still in force. It is not disputed that the officiating period of service could be treated as period spent on probation. Moreover, there is no legal bar for the confirmation of any outstanding officer even during the probation period. We, therefore, find no bar against the confirmation of the appellant in the rank of Inspector in lieu of his meritorious performance. We accordingly accept this appeal and the order dated 26th September, 1977 and the notification, dated 17th October, 1977, deconfirming the appellant are hereby set aside."
Similarly and identical case came before this Tribunal reported as 1982 PLC (C.S.) 443--titled Ch.Abdul Qayyum v. Inspector-General of Police Punjab. Full Bench of this Tribunal, after consideration of the facts of the case, which were similar to the present cases of the appellants, re- affirmed the law settled down in case of Muhammad Ayub Khan and came to the following conclusion:- "I have given anxious thought to the claims of the parties and after perusing the law laid down in this behalf in Raja Muhammad Nawaz case and Muhammad Ayub Khan v. IGP. I am fully convinced that the claim of the appellant cannot be turned down. In Raja Muhammad Nawaz's case the Supreme Court of Pakistan has clearly laid down that once a person is given some status, vide a valid notification and the same is implemented the said right cannot be taken away under the said rules of Locus Poenitentiae and animus revertendi. Similarly the case of Muhammad Ayub Khan v.
IGP is absolutely at par with the case of the appellant. In this case we have laid down in unequivocal manner that once a person has been confirmed by the competent authority and the same has been fully implemented it would not be possible to cancel the same only because certain people were unhappy over it or such action had caused any heart burning among them.
This rule was laid down in the case of Muhammad Ayub Khan v. IGP of Punjab and others, so mentioned earlier by Full Bench of this Tribunal when it was found that Muhammad Ayub Khan was confirmed in view of his meritorious services as Inspector of Police and the same was implemented by the Department. Subsequently this confirmation was withdrawn on a plea that he was too junior and should have not been confirmed under the rules. This Tribunal laid down that confirmation on account of meritorious performance irrespective of rules was not without precedent and was not also legally barred. Under these circumstances the deconfirmation order was set aside. In said case reliance was placed on Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Similarly as mentioned by us in the earlier part of my judgment the view has been fully confirmed by their lordship of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Raja Muhammad Nawaz's case so cited above."
13. In view of these two pronouncements made earlier by this Tribunal relying on the case of Raja Muhammad Nawaz which is the judgment o the Supreme Court of Pakistan the highest Court of the realm, we have no hesitation to repel the contention of the learned District Attorney that the learned Inspector General of Police Punjab, was within its powers to rescind his orders or of his predecessor on the plea that lot of heart burning would be caused among other colleagues of the appellants as they were senior to them and proceed to accept these appeals, set aside the impugned orders and restore the orders by which they were confirmed in the rank of Inspectors.
14. With regard to the request of the appellants that in case the impugned orders are struck down, it would be in all fairness, if the Respondent Government is directed to reconsider the case of the appellants for list 'G', which stood deferred from time to time due to no fault of the appellants but due to lack of ACRs and misrepresentation of Law/Rules, we hereby direct the Respondent to consider the appellants for List 'G' from the dates their juniors were brought on list 'G' in the light of the above judgment. There will be no order as to costs.
A.A./120/Sr.P.