Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Jawed Naqvi Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

March 16, 2007 Friday Safar 26, 1428


KARACHI: Promotions in police dept after verdict



By Our Staff Reporter


KARACHI, March 15: All promotions in the Sindh Police made after March 16, 2006, will be subject to the final outcome of the petition moved by 50 police officers, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Faisal Arab ordered on Thursday.

The petition moved District Police Officer Nazeer Ahmed and 49 others and respondents include Manzoor Ahmad Mughal, Farooq Awan, Rashid Butt, Zulfiqar Junejo and Pir Jan Sirhandi.

Appearing for the petitioners, Advocate Khalid Jawed Khan argued that the bench had passed an interim order against out-of-turn promotions in the police department on March 16, 2006. However, further promotions might be made on the basis of earlier accelerated promotions. He said a large number of police officers were promoted for ‘gallantry’ and for killing or catching outlaws.

In fact, the petitioners’ counsel said, regular promotions in the police had become an exception. He sought modification of the earlier interim order.

Representing the respondent officers, Advocates Abdul Hafeez Lakho, Rasheed A. Razvi, Khwaja Naveed Ahmed and Raza Hashmi contested the plea as it was premature and based on a presumption that further promotions were being granted.

Assistant Advocate-General Qasim Mirjat submitted that the impugned promotions were made strictly in accordance with the law, which would be observed in future also. However, no promotion had been made since the interim order of March 2006 and no modification of the order was warranted.

The bench ordered that any promotion made after March 16, 2006, would be treated as provisional and would be subject to the final order on the petition.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2007