' The appellant joined as Constable in 1971. He was enlisted in list C-II in 1986. He was promoted as Officiating Head Constable (exemptee) through order dated 22-11-1992. However, he was referred to his original position of constable vide order dated 18-11-1997. He filed departmental appeal/representation which was rejected on 25-3-2000, hence the present appeal before this Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that appellant has to his credit more than 100 commendation certificates and that he took active part in police encounters/campaigns for elimination of criminal gangs/mafia and his bravery and valour was appreciated by the high-ups.
It is further maintained by the learned counsel that the appellant earned his promotion as Officiating Head Constable (exemptee) on the basis of excellent record and hardworking. It is further maintained that once the orders of promotion were issued, the same could not be rescinded and the appellant could not be reverted subsequently under the principle of locus poenitentiae as the orders had taken legal effect and the appellant had acquired a valuable legal right to continue as Head Constable. It is also maintained that in case. The appellant was to be reverted, then proceedings should have been initiated under E&D Rules and not in terms of rule 13.8(2) of Police Rules. It is also maintained that orders of promotion were passed by one Superintendent of Police and the same could not be reviewed by his successor/new Superintendent of Police.
3. Learned District Attorney has opposed the appeal pointing out that it is not a case of proceedings under E&D Rules and that the contention of the appellant in that regard is totally misconceived. It is further maintained by learned District Attorney that the authority which was competent to pass an order was.Also competent to denotify the same. It is also maintained that appellant was actually promoted as Officiating Head Constable by the then Superintendent of Police in excess of fixed quota as provided under the rules (rule 13.8(2) of Police Rules). But even then the appellant was reverted after hearing his point of view. It is further maintained that the appellant had made tall claim about his achievements as Constable and as Head Constable whereas the fact is that the appellant was awarded punishment in 1997. It is also contended that the promotion of the appellant as Head Constable was not regular, it was officiating and being found against the rules and in excess of prescribed quota, the same was revoked.
4. I have considered the contentions from both sides and also perused the relevant .Record. I find force in the contention of the learned District Attorney that Ordering Authority was competent to withdraw the same if there was found an error or illegality in the said order. No doubt, the appellant has many commendation certificates to his credit but as per record, his promotion on officiating basis was in excess of the prescribed quota and he was, therefore, subsequently reverted by the same authority i,e, Superintendent of Police, Sahiwal. Any administrative order which contains an element of illegality cannot create any vested right in favor of the beneficiary of that order to continue. Therefore, considering the facts of the case I do not find any merit and substance in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.