| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3506 2016 SLD 3506 2016 PLC 1254 |
Lahore High Court
MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Syed Abdul Wakeel Trimzi for Petitioners (in W.Ps.Nos.5984/2015 and 5694/2015).Aftab Hussain Bhatti for Petitioner (in W.P.No. 3402/2015).Mian Asim Ullah for Petitioner (in W.P.No. 5855/2015).Nemo for Petitioners (in W.P. No. 3250/2015 and W.P.No. 5
MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Syed Abdul Wakeel Trimzi for Petitioners (in W.Ps.Nos.5984/2015 and 5694/2015).Aftab Hussain Bhatti for Petitioner (in W.P.No. 3402/2015).Mian Asim Ullah for Petitioner (in W.P.No. 5855/2015).Nemo for Petitioners (in W.P. No. 3250/2015 and W.P.No. 5
GHULAM AKBAR AND 5 OTHERSVSGOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY HOME AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Police Order (22 of 2002)--- --------Art. 7---Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors (Appointment and Conditions) of Service Rules, 2013---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Civil service---Direct recruitment and promotion of Police sub-inspectors---Discrimination---Petitioners being employees of police department were working as Assistant Sub-Inspectors and Head Constables---Plea of petitioners-employees was that they were eligible and qualified for their further promotion to the rank of Sub-Inspectors---Public Service Commission advertised the posts of Sub-Inspectors wherein on open merit age limit of 20 to 25 years had been specified and from in-service employees age limit of 23 to 35 had been given---Contention of petitioners-employees was that Art.7 of Police Order, 2002 did not provide any age limit for promotion in police service and no condition could be imposed through subservient legislation i.e. Rules---Validity---Government could change Rules or qualification criteria in order to improve the working as well as to maintain good governance in the department considering the changing demands of progressive era---Such change could be taken note by the courts if it was found that same was a person tainted with some mala fides---No fundamental right of the petitioners could be said to have been infringed by change of promotion criteria/rules as such rules had not been changed or framed for any specific person---Recruitment criteria, pay and allowances and all other conditions of service of the police should be such as the Government might from time to time determine---Qualification for direct recruitment and promotion of Sub-Inspectors had been determined through Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013---General law would not apply when there was a special law---Present matter was with regard to police service and it would be governed by Police Order, 2002 as well as the rules framed thereunder---Police Act, 1861 and Police Rules, 1934 would be applicable to a discipline force only while Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 could not serve the purpose---Punjab Civil Servants (Relaxation of Upper…