JALAL-UD-DIN Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SWAT

1. MALIK MUHAMMAD PARVEZ KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑ Appellant Jalal‑ud‑Din, Prosecuting Inspector No.19 has moved this Tribunal through the present appeal under section 4 of the N.‑W.F.P. Service Tribunal's Act, 1974 against the impugned order dated 5‑11‑1986 vide which his representation for the expunction of the adverse re‑narks given to him in the A.C.R. for the year, 1989 was rejected. According to him he was serving at Swat as P‑I when he received certain adverse remarks in his A.C.R. for the year, 1984 on 24‑7‑1985. He made a representation against them but the same was rejected by the authority vide order dated 5‑11‑1986 communicated to him on 17‑1‑1987. He challenged the said remarks as wrong, without foundation, mala fide and illegal. Respondents contested the appeal by filing the written statement and after hearing the parties we propose to dispose of the appeal as under:

2. A perusal of the remarks in the A.C.R. would show that his integrity was treated as doubtful and his performance was considered as slow, not quick and not prompt. He has placed on the record certain commendatory certificates, issued by the heads of the two Special Military Courts, with whom the appellant had been working during the year, 1984. Also on file there are commendation certificates, issued by respondent No.l who admitted in the relevant column the fact that the appellant is a hardworking officer, that he has cleared the pendency from 1971 to 1980 and that he is an efficient person. These admissions of respondent No.l who was the Reporting Officer would negate his own findings contained in the A. C. R. for the said period i.e. 1984. It is to be kept in mind by all the Reporting Officers that the writing of A. C. Rs. is not only a sacred trust reposed in them by the Government but it also involves the career of an officer. The personal likes and dislikes, bias and mala fide must be kept aside while writing the A.C.R. of a subordinate. A public servant /Government servant is bound to exhibit integrity and efficiency. These are the two basic and fundamental principles on which the entire fabric of service is knitted. If a Government servant is labelled to be inefficient and not a man of integrity simple writing in the A.C.Rs. cannot be considered as a whole truth. Authority has got the ample powers to proceed against him under the rules. There was a full year at the discretion of the Reporting Officer. He was in contact with him, his other colleagues and the public at large and these findings must be based on solid proof. The respondents failed to point out that there was any complaint, any writing against the appellant by the public or there was any other allegation regarding his inefficiency. There was no counselling or warning to him by the respondents during this period. Respondents also failed to show that how the appellant was inefficient. On the basis of the above, we have no hesitation in accepting the present appeal by setting aside the impugned order and direct that the said remarks be expunged from the A. C. R. of the official concerned for the year, 1984. Parties are left to bear their own costs and file be consigned to the record room.

3. S.Q. /75/Sr.N Appeal accepted