Law:

Section:

Police Rules, 1934--- ----R.16.32---Sindh Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1988, R.6(3)(b)(i)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Compulsory retirement of petitioner---Finality of order---Revisional jurisdiction---Scope---Petitioner served police department for 36 years but due to his absence without leave, he was proceeded under R.6 (3)(b)(i) of Sindh Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1988, and penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed upon him---Appellate authority set aside the penalty and accepted appeal filed by petitioner by converting his absence without leave into medical leave---Authorities sought revision of order passed by appellate authority and declined to implement order already passed in appellate jurisdiction---Validity---Appellate authority passed a judicial order in appeal which by all means was final in nature---Though order of Appellate authority was subject to revision in terms of R.16.32 of Police Rules, 1934, but such revision was only available to petitioner and not department itself and it could only be preferred to the authority next above the prescribed Appellate authority---Appellate authority was the highest authority in police department, as such no revision could have been preferred in the matter, even by petitioner himself---Whether order passed by Appellate authority was correct or not, could only be decided by challenging the same further in accordance with law and not by seeking clarification or reconsideration of the comments already filed by department---Appellate authority in clear terms had passed order in favour of petitioner and after setting aside order of compulsory retirement treated absence period (without any qualification) as leave on medical grounds---After passing of order in appeal, Appellate authority had become functous officio, as no clarification or modification of such order was permissible under the law---Appellate authority had conclusively decided that petitioner stood retired from service at the age of 60 years, therefore, inference drawn by department that there was no categorical decision regarding intervening period was not correct and subsequent orders…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492