| Case ID |
442d3fc6-cf70-4cab-85e8-c6d9475f843c |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
|
| Decision Date |
Nov 02, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
Nov 02, 2022 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan set aside the impugned judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 30.11.2018, which had erroneously relegated the appellant, Syed Hammad Nabi, in the seniority list of Inspectors. The Court held that the final seniority of police officers is determined by the date of confirmation as per Rule 12.2(3) of the Police Rules, 1934, and not by the date of appointment. The Tribunal's reliance on the Qayyum Nawaz judgment was dismissed as it was deemed a leave-refusing order without binding precedential value. The Court emphasized the importance of organizational justice within the police force, ensuring that internal governance follows established rules to maintain efficiency, autonomy, and morale. Consequently, the Court directed the Inspector General of Police to form a committee to reassess the seniority of the involved parties and address any grievances in accordance with the specified rules. The decision underscores the necessity for rule-based administration in policing to uphold constitutional values and the foundational principles of fairness and transparency. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Syed Hammad Nabi and others versus Inspector General of Police Punjab, Lahore and others, the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered a pivotal judgment on November 2, 2022, addressing the critical issue of seniority determination among police officers in the Punjab Police. The case encompassed Civil Appeals Nos. 1172 to 1178 of 2020 and Civil Petitions Nos. 3789 to 3796, alongside several others, challenging the Punjab Service Tribunal's judgment dated November 30, 2018.
Central to the dispute was the interpretation of Rule 12.2(3) of the Police Rules, 1934, which delineates the criteria for establishing the seniority of police officers. The appellants, led by Syed Hammad Nabi, contended that their seniority should be based on the date of confirmation following the completion of a three-year probationary period and successful attainment of requisite training courses. Conversely, the respondents argued for seniority based on the initial appointment dates, aligning with a prior tribunal judgment in Qayyum Nawaz.
The Supreme Court meticulously analyzed the Police Rules and the constitutional provisions under the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, particularly Articles 4(1), 14(1), 18, 25, 37, 38, and 185(3), which enshrine principles of organizational justice and ensure fair treatment within public service sectors. The Court held that the Tribunal's reliance on the Qayyum Nawaz judgment was misplaced, as it was a leave-refusing order that lacked binding precedent status. Emphasizing that only definitive rulings with established legal principles should influence judicial decisions, the Court reaffirmed that seniority must be determined by the date of confirmation, not the date of initial appointment.
Furthermore, the judgment underscored the importance of organizational justice within the police force, advocating for transparent and rule-based internal governance. The Court highlighted that deviations from established procedures, such as ante-dated confirmations or delays in promotions, could erode trust, diminish morale, and impair operational efficiency. By directing the Inspector General of Police to form a committee to reassess and rectify seniority listings, the Court ensured that the Police department adheres strictly to legal frameworks, thereby fostering a professional and accountable policing environment.
This decision not only rectified the specific grievances of the appellants but also set a precedent for future cases concerning service regulations and organizational justice within law enforcement agencies. By reinforcing the supremacy of clearly defined rules over inconsistent tribunal interpretations, the Supreme Court promoted a standardized approach to administrative justice, essential for maintaining public trust and the effective functioning of the police force. The judgment serves as a cornerstone for upholding constitutional values and ensuring that police officers are treated with fairness and equity, thereby enhancing the overall integrity and efficacy of the criminal justice system in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Government of Punjab,
Punjab Service Tribunal,
Punjab Police,
Inspector General of Police,
Punjab Constabulary,
Rawalpindi Range/Region
|
| Judges |
Syed Mansoor Ali Shah,
Ayesha A. Malik
|
| Lawyers |
Mian Bilal Bashir, Advocate Supreme Court,
Syed R.H. Shah, Advocate-on-Record,
Ch. Zulifqar Ali, Advocate Supreme Court (through V.L. Lahore Registry),
Maqbool Hussain Sh. Advocate Supreme Court,
Talaat Farooq Sh. Advocate Supreme Court (through V.L. Lahore Registry),
Safdar Shaheen Pirzada, Advocate Supreme Court for Applicants (in C.M.A. 8616 of 2022),
Muddasar Khalid Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court,
Muhammad Ramzan Khan, Advocate Supreme Court,
M. Sharif Janjua, Advocate-on-Record,
Kaleem Ilyas, Advocate Supreme Court,
Raja Muhammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents,
Atta Muhammad - respondent-in-person,
Ashfaq Ahmad Kharral, Additional A.G.,
Kamran Adil, DIG (Legal),
Sh. Asif, S.P.,
Amir Khalil Syed, S.P.,
Kashif Butt, A.D. for the Government of Punjab
|
| Petitioners |
Syed HAMMAD NABI and others
|
| Respondents |
INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PUNJAB, LAHORE and others
|
| Citations |
2023 SLD 569,
2023 SCMR 584
|
| Other Citations |
Qayyum Nawaz,
Mushtaq Warriach,
Muhammed Yousaf and others v. Abdul Rashid and others,
Muhammad Salman v. Naveed Anjum 2021 SCMR 1675,
Tariq Badr v. NBP 2013 SCMR 314,
Quinn v. Leathem 1901 AC 495,
Trustees of the Port of Karachi v. Muhammad Saleem 1994 SCMR 2213,
SHCBA v. Federation PLD 2009 SC 879,
Khairpur Textile Mills v. NBP 2003 CLD 326,
Raza Safdar Kazmi,
Ali Azhar Khan Baluch,
Gul Hasan Jatoi,
R. 12.2(3),
Section: 12.2(3),
Section: 4(1), 14(1), 18, 25, 37, 38, 185(3)
|
| Laws Involved |
Police Rules, 1934,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973,
Police Order (22 of 2002)
|
| Sections |
12.2(3),
4(1),
14(1),
18,
25,
37,
38,
185(3)
|