' SARDAR MUHAMMAD SAJAWAL KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---This is an appeal by Haji Muhammad Yousaf Inspector of Police against the Government Order No, 2011-20/83, dated 23-5-1983 by which the Government Order No,444-48/83, dated 30-1-1983 was set aside and the seniority of the appellant in the cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Police was refixed next below to respondents Nos. 2 to 5. The appellant has impleaded Azad Gavernment of the State of Jammu and Kashmir through its Chief Secretary, Abdul Qayyum Gillani, Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Sarwar, Deputy Superintendents of Police as well as Abdul Majeed, Inspector of Police as respondents for seeking his relief against them.
2. The relevant facts as contained in the memo. Of his appeal are that the appellant joined his service as Head Clerk in the Office of Superintendent of Police, Poonch and he was selected for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police vide Inspector-General of Police Order No,1937, dated 26-3-1963.
The appellant continued as Head Clerk in the Office of Superintendent of Police till 6 posts of Head Clerks of the Police Department were converted and redesignated as Sub-Inspector of Police w,e,f,5-5-1965 and according to the appellant in view of his earlier selection, he had become Sub- Inspector of Police w,e,f, the date the post of Head Clerk held by him was redesignated as Sub- Inspector of Police. It is asserted by the appellant that according to the aforesaid order of redesignation of his post his seniority was to be reckoned w,e,f, 5-5-1965. But the appellant was denied his proper position in the seniority list and his seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspector of Police was given effect from 21-3-1968. The appellant represented to the Government against the aforesaid order of fixation of his seniority which was duly accepted by the Government and his position was restored. But subsequently, when a review petition was brought by the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 before the respondent-Government, the earlier order dated 30-1-1983 by which the seniority of the appellant was accepted w,e,f, 5-5-1965 was set aside and the appellant was again shown to be junior to the respondents Nos. 2 to 5. Feeling dissatisfied with the, aforesaid Government order, the appellant has brought this appeal at this forum for reconsideration of the matter. The appellant seeks reversal of the impugned order on the following grounds:-
(a) That under the impugned order, the seniority of the appellant was disturbed keeping in view the decision of this Tribunal given in the case entitled Kh. Ali Muhammad v. Inspector-General of Police whereas the facts of that case were quite different to that of the appellant;
(b) That the appellant was duly selected for the post of Sub-Inspector whereas Kh. Ali Muhammad was never selected for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police prior to the redesignation of his post of Head Clerk;
(c) That the appellant had become Sub-Inspector of Police immediately after the redesignation of his post of Head Clerk because of his earlier selection on 5-5-1965. Kh. Ali Muhammad was not selected for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police and rather he was given option to join the Regular Police and he had become the Sub-Inspector of Police after he had opted to join in that Force;
(d) That the appellant after his selection as Sub-Inspector was waiting for the vacancy of Sub- Inspector of Police and When the vacancy occurred on the 5th May, 1965 he had become Sub- Inspector of police in the regular cadre and was allotted his enrolment number as Sub-Inspector of Police in Regular Police Force.
(e) That Sub-Inspectors of Police who were originally belonging to the Sections of Reserve and Ranger Police were confirmed on the posts of Sub-Inspectors of Police w,e,f, the date on which they were transferred to that force from the Section of Reserves and Ranger Police. On the basis of that principle, the appellant was also entitled to the seniority w,e,f, the date 5-5-1965 on which his post of Head Clerk was redesignated as Sub-Inspector of Police in the Regular Police Force.
3. The appellant's prayer is that the impugned Government order may be set aside and the senior position of the appellant as was previously determined by the Government may be restored.
4. Originally, this appeal of the appellant was admitted for regular hearing by a short order of this Tribunal which was earlier made by Kh. Abdus Samad, a learned Member of this Tribunal in the order sheet. Of the file. The objections were filed on behalf of the respondents and it was submitted on their behalf that the appellant was promoted to the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police on 18-12- 1969 when a post of Sub-Inspector had fallen vacant on the retirement of one Muhammad Shareef, Sub-Inspector of police. The seniority in the cadre of subordinate Police Officers is fixed from date of their promotion and the date of entry into grade in the respective cadre and not from the date of conversion or redesignation of the post. The appellant was not entitled to any relief and his appeal was meriting dismissal. The appellant examined one Manzoor Ahmed, Senior Clerk of the Office of Inspector-General of Police besides appearing himself as witness of his case while no evidence was led by the respondents in defence. The appeal was disposed of by a detailed order (kded 29- 9-1988 made by Raja Bashir Ahmed Khan, learned Chairman and Raja Muhammad Ashraf Khan Kayani, Member of this Tribunal and by that order the appeal of the appellant was dismissed. On appeal brought before the Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, the file was remanded back to this Tribunal for fresh decision after calling upon the parties for fresh evidence as to when the respondents were promoted to the post of Sub-Inspectors of Police and the position assigned to them in the seniority list. On receipt of the file both the parties were asked to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions and out of the parties the appellant as well as Mr. Abdul Qayyum Gillani, respondent No, 2 were once again examined as witness of their case. Besides their testimony, the respondent Abdul Qayyum Gillani filed seniority list of Sub-Inspectors Exh. DZ, 'F' list Exh. DZ/1, seniority list of Deputy Superintendents of Police Exh. DZ/2, copy of written petition Exh.
DZ/3, copy of High Court order Exh. DZ/2. Apart from that the parties submitted each of their service books prepared by their Department.
5. We have carefully considered the arguments as were addressed to this Tribunal by the learned counsel of the parties. We have also considered the record as was placed on the file by the parties in regard to their contentions about their position in the seniority list in the cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Police. It is argued on behalf of the appellant that his seniority was to be reckoned from the date on which the post of Head Clerk held by him in the Office of Superintendent of Police was converted and redesignated as Sub-Inspector of Police viz. 5-5-1965 while the contention of the respondents is that the appellant's seniority is to be reckoned w,e,f, 18-12-1969 the date on which he was properly adjusted against clear vacancy caused by the retirement of Sardar Muhammad Shareef Khan, Sub-Inspector of Police. In respect of civil servants, the rule for the fixation of the seniority is regulated by rule 8 of Azad Kashmir Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977. But in the case of upper subordinates of police force service, Rule 12.2 Police Rules, 1934 as in force in Azad Kashmir is applicable and the relevant portion of that rule is reproduced below:-- "Seniority, in the case of upper subordinates, will be reckoned in the first instance from date of first appointment, officers promoted from a lower rank being considered senior to persons appointed direct on the same date, and the seniority of officers appointed direct on the same date being reckoned according to age. Seniority shall, however, be finally settled by dates of confirmation, the seniority inter se of several officers confirmed on the same date being that allotted to them on first appointment; Provided that any officer whose promotion or confirmation is delayed by reason of his being on deputation outside his range or district shall, on being promoted or confirmed, regain the seniority which he originally held vis-a-vis any officer promoted or confirmed before him during his deputation.
A plain reading of the above Rule of Procedure makes it clear that there is no Rule of procedure by which the seniority in cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Police is to be reckoned from the date a post of Head Clerk is changed and redesignated as Sub-Inspector of Police. We are afraid, we cannot contribute to this view that with the selection of anybody for being appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police, the appellant had in fact entered in the regular Police Force Service. At the same time, the changing of designation of the post of Head Clerk into that of police Sub-Inspector is also not a good ground for allowing him seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Regular Police Force without firstly joining that Force under a regular enrolment number. In the instant case the appellant after his selection for his appointment as Sub-Inspector of Regular Police Force continued as Head Clerk in the Office of Superintendent of Police and was paid his salary out of Budget provision of the Ministerial Staff of the Police Department while he had to wait for a long time for the adjustment against a clear vacancy in Police Force which subsequently fell vacant on the retirement of Sardar Muhammad Shareef Khan, Sub-Inspector of Police. The Order of Inspector-General of Police dated 3-1-1981 which is placed on the file of appeal as Exh. D.C. Is the most proper and beautiful order which has been made in regard to the seniority of the appellant.
According to the Police Rules, the appellant has been given seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspectors w,e,f, 21-3-1968 the date on which he was confirmed on the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. This order of Inspector-General of Police was, no doubt, vacated by the Government under its Order No, 444-48/83, dated 3-1-1983 but on filing of the review petition, the Government vacated its order upholding the original order of the Inspector-General of Police. We find that the order made by the Inspector-General of Police is perfectly correct in accordance with the Police Rules and the contention of the appellant that he was senior to respondents Nos. 2 to 5 is held completely devoid of force.
6. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant that the facts of the case of Kh. Ali Muhammad Sub-Inspector of Police were quite different to that of the appellant may be true to some extent yet the rule of seniority discussed therein is on all fours with the case of appellant and the subsequent decision taken by the respondent-Government is quite in accordance with law.
7. Through the extract copy of the seniority list of Sub-Inspectors of Police placed on the file, we find that the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 held senior positions to the appellant whose name was placed at serial No,
44. Among the respondents, Syed Abdul Qayyum Gillani was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector on 16-6-1965 and was confirmed as such against that post on 24-12-1965, Muhammad Aslant was promoted as Sub-Inspector on 16-1-1967 and was also confirmed from that date while similar is the position of Ch. Muhammad Sarwar. Respondent No, 5, Abdul Majeed also ranks senior to the appellant because he was also confirmed on the post of Sub-Inspector on 16-3-1967 quite earlier than the date of confirmation of the appellant, viz. 21-3-1968.
' For the aforesaid reasons, we find no force in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to the costs.