Find a Lawyer

MIRZA MUHAMMAD YOUSIF versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Sindh Civil Servants (Qualifications and Discipline) Rules 1973 R 4 Mandatory Retirement Appellant, Assistant Sub Inspector when on patrol duty allegedly showing excessive degradation, duty discharge, disqualification and neglect of duty. A robbery occurred. The jewelry store was processed under appellant's performance and discipline rules and the investigation against them resulted in a mandatory retirement penalty because appellant was given a final showcase notice and sentenced to fines. A pre-award hearing was provided where the robbery took place in the shop. The area of operation assigned to the mobile patrolling team, headed by the appellant, was under the jurisdiction of another police officer, who was closer to the incident site than the appellant and within minutes of the robber's appellant's departure. The charge was admitted but he claimed that he did everything he could and ran behind the culprits but he could not be found. The other team was also shown no result that the appellant's appeal was not suppressed. But on the plea that the appellant was subjected to discrimination because of this other poll No action was taken against this officer, who was under the jurisdiction of the robbery, no explanation was given by the State Counsel as to why no action was taken. The penalty imposed on the appellant against the other police officer was rather rary and harsh and in this case it was not permissible that the mandatory retirement sentence be replaced with a reduction in rank. pakistani advocates Sakardu lawyer