IJAZ NISAR, J.- The relevant facts are that Akhtar Umar Hayat petitioner was appointed as Sergeant Inspector on 29th August, 1989 against a substantive post. After having successfully completed the probationary period, he was due for confirmation on its expiry w.e.f. 29.8.1989, the date of his induction in service. According to the petitioner, the delay in passing formal order in this behalf was an impediment to his accelerated promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police in pursuance of the recommendations by the concerned authorities, as a reward for showing gallantry in an encounter with a dangerous outlaw and proclaimed offender in the year 1992 in District Mianwali.
2. The petitioner has referred to the following observations of Inspector General of Police of 7th June, 1993:- "What outstanding act/performance, distinct from other 198 Police Officers & men, has been displayed by Inspector Umar Hayat which has merited this vague recommendations from the DIG/SR? Similar observation is recorded for S.I. Waqar Ahmad?
Have that remaining 198 officers & men done nothing?
Please ask DIG/SP to minutely examine all circumstances attending the encounter and the role of each Police Officer and report".
The DIG Police Sargodha Range, Sargodha submitted the requisite report vide his letter dated 27.3.19*14 and recommended the petitioner for accelerated promotion on the basis of his courageous and active role in the encounter by the Departmental Promotion Committee constituted by him but the petitioner was discriminated and not dealt with in accordance with law and the precedent cases regarding confirmation and out-of-turn promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, in recognition of his gallantry and extraordinary performance at the risk of his own life. In support of the allegations of discrimination, a reference has been made to the case of S.I. Waqar Ahmad who was not only admitted to Promotion List "F" w.e.f. 8.5.1993 but was also granted out of turn promotion as Inspector for his outstanding performance in the same encounter.
3. According to the petitioner, his last representation was also recommended by the DIG, Traffic Police and forwarded to IGP for his confirmation as Sergeant Inspector and promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police vide his letter dated 15.12.1994.
4. The petitioner has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court by filing the writ petition claiming the following relief: -
(a) for his confirmation in his rank as Sergeant Inspector with effect from the date of his induction in the service on 29th August, 1989, after having successfully completed his probationary period of three years prescribed under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934.
(b) to direct the IGP for the transmission of his case to the Government for accelerated promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as recommended by the concerned authorities, for gallantry performance in the discharge of his duties,
(c) to direct the Government for the grant of accelerated promotion to him in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee, and
(d) to declare the petitioner entitled to out-of-turn promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as a special case like S.I. Waqar Ahmad who had been admitted to Promotion list "P and granted promotion as Inspector for participating in the same encounter and other such procedent cases.
5. The Inspector General of Police Punjab in his comments has admitted that DIG, Sargodha Range Sargodha had recommended the petitioner for confirmation as a special case but stated that the case of the petitioner was considered by the competent authority and find because the Police Rule, 13.20 which empowered the authority to relax rules in individual cases of hardship were amended w.e.f. 7.12.1994 taking away the power of out-of-turn confirmation/promotion from the Inspector General of Police.
6. The petitioner in his rejoinder submitted that the objections raised by the IGP are misconceived, discriminatory and breach of practice in vogue and the case law. According to him, his confirmation as Sergeant Inspector was due at the time of his gallantry performance after having successfully completed his probationary period, prescribed by the statutory rules and the objection regarding non-availability of substantive post was baseless as having already been settled by the Police in the cases cited as Writ Petition Nos. 6923/89, 6682/91 and 9733/91 instituted by the Sergeant Inspectors. It is further stated that the amendment in Rule 13.20 of the Punjab Police Rule, 1934 is no bar to the accelerated promotion of the petitioner to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as the amendment has no retrospective effect and is also not relevant for his promotion to the higher rank which is to be made under the Punjab Deputy Superintendents of Police Service Rules, 1974 as amended on 14.10.1986 framed under Section 23 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974.
Furthermore, that there is a specific provision in Section 8-A of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 for out-of-turn promotion as a reward in recognition of extraordinary, gallantry and accelerated performance by a civil servant. The case of Shafqat Bari who was promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police out-of-turn on gallantry performance by the IGP is fully applicable to the case of the petitioner.
7. The confirmation of Sergeant Inspector appointed by Additional Recruitment Committee is to be made on the successful completion of his probationary period. The very fact that he was allowed to continue in service after the completion of his probationary period shows that he had successfully completed his probationary period and was entitled to be confirmed from the due date in the light of the recommendations of Deputy Inspector General of Police, Sargodha Range, Sargodha. It is not denied that the petitioner was recommended for confirmation as Inspector by S.P.Mianwali as also for his accelerated promotion. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Sargodha Range, Sargodha had also made a similar recommendation vide his letter No. 6023, dated 27.3.1994. By the same letter, he had recommended S.I.Waqar Ahmad for Promotion to the rank of Inspector after admission of his name in the Promotion List "F" as special case. The recommendation to the extent of S.I. Waqar Ahmad was accepted by the Additional Inspector General of Police Punjab, Lahore on 8th May, 1993 and the following order was passed: "Inspector Waqar Ahmad No. S. 23 of Sargodha Range admitted to Promotion List "F' with immediate effect as a special case for showing splendid and outstanding performance in an encounter confronted with P.O. Muhammad Nawaz and Barbri and was eliminated. The desperado was wanted in 20 cases of different nature i.e. Murder, attempt to murder, Hudood Ordinance and Haraba etc".
8. In the wake of the above circumstances, the amendment made in the Police Rule, 13.20 w.e.f.
7.12.1994 taking away the power from the authority, the relax rules in individual cases of hardship will not stand in the way of the petitioner from being given the same treatment as was given to S.I.
Waqar Ahmad on 8.5.1993, and endorsed by the DIG Police, Sargodha Range Sargodha on 23rd December, 1992. The petitioner was already due for his confirmation after the expiry of the prescribed period of probation.
In the above circumstances, I find no reason for the discriminatory treatment meted out to the petitioner for not considering him for out-of-turn promotion like S.I. Waqar Ahmad promoted on the basis of the same encounter. In consequence, the writ petition is accepted and the relief, as prayed for by the petitioner, is granted to him, with no order as to costs.