Find a Lawyer

Case No: 57/1571 of 1982, decided on 23rd October, 1982,

---R. 12.8 ‑ Temporary A. S. 1. Police under training ‑ Found involved in heinous crimes like murder and anti‑social activities‑ Discharged from service for concealment of facts‑Appellant, held, to be unsuitable for disciplined force of Police Department.

Ajtab Gul for Appellant.

Haroon.ur‑Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondents.

‑ Zafar Iqbal Awan has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded Government of the Punjab through Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Home Department, Lahore, D. I.‑G. Bahawalpur Range, Bahawalpur and Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, Lahore, as respondents.

2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the orders, dated 1st April, 1981 and 5th January, 1982 of the respondents be declared as being without lawful authority and of no legal effect with the result that the appellant be restored to services with all back benefits.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was recruited as temporary A. S.‑I. on 2nd May, 1981 and sent for training to Police Training College, Sihala. After his departure to the said Institute, it came to light that the appellant had made false statement before the Selection Board as he stood involved in three criminal cases invoking penalties under section 302/307/1447/148/149, P. P. C. and under section 307/506, P. P. C. Although the appellant had been acquitted in one case discharged in the other and the third case was withdrawn from the Court, yet it was clear that he was involved in heinous crime and anti‑social activities. It was also taken note of the fact that he gave wrong address in order to conceal his activities. Due to the above reasons the appellant was discharged under Police Rules 12.8 by the D. I.‑G. Police, Bahawalpur Range, Bahawalpur on 1st April, 1981. The appellant preferred his appeal before the Inspector‑General of Police, Punjab, where he was given full opportunity to establish his innocence but he could not satisfy the said authority, therefore, the Additional I.‑G. P. rejected the representation on the ground that there was no merit in his case. Hence this appeal.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant was a graduate from the Islamia University, Bahawalpur and obtained Master's Degree in Political Science. It has been further argued that the appellant topped the list of the candidates who were so elected by the Selection Board and was directed to join the Police Training College, Sihala, to complete his training as A. S.‑I. It has been vehemently argued that the services of the appellant could not be terminated in this arbitrary manner without affording him an opportunity to defend himself through a regular show‑cause notice, With regard to the allegation against him that he gave wrong address it has been submitted that the appellant's dismissal was ordered in the year 1976 when the appellant and his family was residing in Chak No. 1441Murad P. S. Hasilpur in District Bahawal pur. In June, 1979 the appellant's family sold their entire property in this Chak and purchased land in Chak No. 2/D. N. B. P. S. Dera Nawab Sahib. district Babawalpur, therefore, the appellant did not make any false statement before the Selection Board and could not be condemned on that account. Learned counsel for the appellant has also vehemently denied that the appellant was associated with the anti‑social activities or was a Member of a Political Party. With regard to his involvement in three criminal cases, it has been submitted that the same could not be taken against him as he was acquitted in one, discharged in the second and third case was withdrawn by the Government itself. Learned counsel for the appellant has also denied that he gave false report that Constable Jamaat Ali was his paternal‑grandfather although he was actually the maternal‑grandfather of Exh. A. S.‑I.

6. On the other hand learned District Attorney has submitted that the appointment of the appellant was subject to the conditions which he bad accepted and therefore, he could not claim protection against the same. According to the learned District Attorney it was made clear to the candidates through advertisement as well as at the time of their recruitment that in case they failed to pass the prescribed departmental course or were found unfit for Police service they would be liable to be discharged during temporary period of training or period of probation without any show‑cause notice. It has been submitted that written consent to that effect was also obtained from the appellant, therefore, it does not lie in his mouth now to say that he was entitled to show‑cause notice against the order of his discharge. Learned District Attorney has fully adopted the para-wise comments as submitted by the D. L.G. Police, Bahawalpur and has stoutly resisted the claim of the appellant that he was innocent and not guilty of any misconduct.

7. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments so raised by the parties before us and find that the appellant did sign the documents which clearly indicated that his services could be terminated without any show‑cause notice, if it was found that he was unfit for Police service. The record of the case further reveals that the appellant was involved in the following three criminal cases :‑

(i) F. I. R. No. 137/77, dated 12th May, 1977 under section 302/307/ 447/148/149, P. P. C, Police Station Hasilpur.

(ii) F. I. R. No. 283/74, .dated 7th October, 1974, under section 188, P. P. C., Police Station Civil Lines, Bahawalpur.

(iii) F. I. R. No. 31/80, dated 28th January, 1980 under section 307/506, P. P. C., Police Station Civil Lines, Bahawalpur.

The record of this case further reveals that the appellant claimed relation ship with Jamaat Ali a retired Constable claiming him his paternal grandfather which enabled him for selection. It is also on the record that the said Jamaat Ali was actually the maternal‑grandfather and as such, he was not entitled to any marks on this count.

8. We have examined the record with regard to his dismissal and find that the appellant belongs to Chak No. 144/Murad, Police Station Hasilpur and not to Chak No. 2/D.N.B. Police Station Dera Nawab Sahib, where his family has only one square of land purchased in the year 1979. The domicile certificate produced by him shows that appellant hails from Police Station Hasilpur. In this way if he had shown his correct residence then his involvement in a murder case would have been reported by the local police. We have also looked into the Police record and find that appellant took active part in students Union activities and was a member of the P. S. F. and later the N. S. F. and became thick with the General Secretary and workers of defunct‑P. P. P.

9. With this record of the appellant's career and his involvement in the political activities of the defunct‑P. P. P. particularly with the background of his involvement in heinous crimes like murder attempt and murder etc. he would be hardly a fit person to be detained in the' disciplined Force of Police Department. We have carefully looked into the detailed order of the D. I.‑G. Police as well as the order of Additional I.‑G. P. and find that both these officers took into consideration all the pros and cons of this case and came to the conclusion that despite brilliant academic record of the appellant as a student, he would be unsuitable person for a department which requires a clean background free from any political inference.

10. In view of the above we do not find any justification to interfere with the two well‑considered orders of the respondents keeping in view a glaring fact that the appellant was a temporary A. S. I. with a few days service at his credit, and that too as a trainee in the Police Training Institute, Sihala. We do not find any merit in this appeal which is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Decision to be communicated to the parties.

M. I. Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.