Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2101 1989 SLD 2101 1989 PLC 284
Service Tribunal, Punjab
Case No. 815/494 of 1985, decided on 3rd May, 1986.
ABDUL, JABBAR KHAN, CHAIRMAN, ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHARY AND MIAN FAIZ KARIM, MEMBERS

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

TAJ MUHAMMAD

VS

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SAHIWAL and another

Law:

Section:

Police Rules, 1934-- ---R. 12.21--Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S. 4--Police constable-­Services terminated for his failure twice to clear departmental examination-­Appellant constable's only plea in appeal was that one of his colleagues, having met the same fate, his order of discharge from service was recalled by authority to give him one more chance--Such colleague's case being similar to appellant he should also be given one more chance--Service Tribunal sent appellant's case to authority for reconsideration and if feasible, to give petitioner one more chance. Zia ud Dirt for Appellant. A.G: Humayun for Respondents. JUDGMENT S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--Taj Muhammad, ex-Constable No. 574 of district Sahiwal, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974 in which he has impleaded the Superintendent of Police, Sahiwal, and Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, Lahore, as respondents. 2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the orders of respondents be set aside and he be reinstated in service. 3. Brief facts of the case arc that the appellant joined Police Force on 9-5-1982, and kept on working there till 13-10-1984. The appellant was detailed to take examination for P.R.T.C. at Multan in which he appeared twice but except in one paper i.e. Pakistan Penal Code, he was declared successful in all other subjects. His services were terminated by order dated 13-10-1984, as he had failed to qualify the examination and was discharged under Police Rule 12.21 on account of his inefficiency and dis-interestedness for acquiring his professional training and skill. The appellant filed appeal before the learned I.-G. Police, Punjab, which was also rejected. 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 only relied on the order dated 28-3-1985, passed by the Additional Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, Lahore, in the case of Khalid Riaz No: 1974 of Multan…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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