Syed SHABBIR HUSSAIN vs PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the petitioner, who challenged his reversion from the post of Superintendent to his original post of Concurrent Auditor. The petitioner was promoted subject to a special report following adverse annual confidential reports for the years 1980 and 1981, which were subsequently expunged by the Service Tribunal. The core legal question is whether the expungement of earlier adverse reports renders the subsequent unsatisfactory special report and the resultant reversion inoperative. The Supreme Court held that despite the expungement of the earlier adverse entries, the adverse remarks in the special report remained intact and provided a sufficient and independent basis for the department to direct the petitioner's reversion. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. The key principle laid down is that an unsatisfactory special report recorded during a probationary or conditional promotion constitutes an independent and valid ground for reversion, notwithstanding the subsequent expungement of earlier adverse annual confidential reports that initially prompted the condition.
- Whether the expungement of earlier adverse annual confidential reports invalidates a subsequent unsatisfactory special report leading to reversion?
- Does an adverse special report recorded during a conditional promotion provide sufficient basis for reversion?
- When can a civil servant be lawfully reverted to their original post following a conditional promotion?
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was serving as a Concurrent Auditor in the office of the District Food Controller, Gujrat. He received adverse reports in the years 1980 and 1981. On 20-9- 1982, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee, he was promoted to the post of Superintendent subject to a special report to be recorded by the District Food Controller after six months. The special report recorded by the District Food Controller was highly unsatisfactory whereupon he was reverted to his original post of Concurrent Auditor. He challenged his reversion in appeal before the Provincial Service Tribunal which was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that the Departmental Promotion Committee had added the condition of special report to his promotion for the reason that there were adverse entries in his record for the year 1980 and 1981. These entries were later expunged by the Tribunal; consequently, the condition attached to his promotion by the Departmental Promotion Committee became inoperative. Thus, he could not be reverted for the reason that the special report recorded after 6 months was not satisfactory.
3. It is difficult to accept the contention of the petitioner. Even though the adverse remarks recorded in his annual confidential report for the years 1980 and 1981 were later expunged, the adverse remarks recorded in the special report which still stand furnished sufficient basis to the department to direct his reversion. It is therefore, not a fit case where leave to appeal should be granted. The petition is dismissed.