MUHAMMAD AYUB Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAHAWALNAGAR
S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN) . ‑Muhammad Ayub Ex‑A. S.‑I., has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act of 1974 against his retirement under section 12 (ii) of the same Act after completion of 25 years of service.
2. By virtue of this appeal the appellant has prayed that the impugned order, dated 10th January, 1981 be set aside and he be re‑instated in service.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the S. P., Bahawalnagar being the competent authority reviewed the cases of all Government servants who had completed 25 years or more service, posted under his control including the case of Muhammad Ayub in the month of January, 1980. The competent authority after giving consideration to the service record, retired the appellant w. e. f. 10th January, 1980. Similarly his petition before the I.‑ G. Police was rejected vide order, dated 11th November, 1980 was rejected. Hence this appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned District Attorney assisted by the representative of the department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant in the grounds of his appeal mainly assailed the justification of the appellant's retirement by submitting that he was a person who had already crossed 25 years of service and was allowed to continue. He has also recounted the performance of the appellant as a Police Officer and submitted that he being a person of good record should not have been retired. When confronting with the P. C. O. of 1981 of the learned counsel for the appellant came forward with an argument which he has given in his amended appeal. It was further submitted that as the appellant was a recruit of the Bahawalpur State, the competent authority to appoint or retire the appellant was Commissioner therefore, he should have been retired under Bahawalpur Police Service Rules and not under 1974 Act. Therefore, respondent No. 1 was not competent authority to retire the appellant not being appointing authority of the appellant. For this he has relied on Annexure `D' a letter from I.‑G. P., West Pakistan, to all Heads of Police Offices in West Pakistan, dated 14th December, 1957 in which it has been stated that persons recruited before 1957 would continue to be governed by their respective Police Rules which were enforced before 30th January, 1958, as for as personnel recruited after 30th January, 1958 the Punjab Police Rules would apply.
6. We have given out anxious thought to the proposition so advanced before us and repell the same as unfounded on the ground that by the amendment of the rules which provide that all serving police personnel would be covered by the 1974 Rules, therefore, this letter would be of no avail to the appellant. We have discussed in detail this legal issue so raised before us in the appeal of Sub‑Inspector Muhammad Suleman v. I‑G. P who belonged to former Bahawalpur State. Moreover, it is on the record that this appellant was promoted as A. S.‑ I. under the Punjab Police Rules, therefore, he cannot seek protection of a letter which has lost its value in view of amended rules on this subject.
7. The result is we dismiss the appeal as being without any fotce, The parties will bear their own costs.
A. E. Appeal dismissed.