0
KARACHI, July 24: The Sindh High Court asked the central selection board on Tuesday to review promotion cases of three grade 19 police officers at its next meeting without taking into consideration unsubstantiated intelligence reports.
Syed Zulfiqar Ali Shah, deputy inspector-general, Sukkur, Din Mohammad Baloch, district police officer, Khairpur, and Nazar Hussain Khoso, district police officer, Dadu, submitted in their petitions that they were rejected for promotion to grade 20 by the central selection board at its meeting held on Aug 28, 2006.
Their counsel, Abdul Hafeez Lakho and Abdul Mubeen Lakho, said the board acted on vague and general intelligence reports blandly asserting that ‘they did not enjoy good reputation’.
The lawyers said intelligence reports without back-up material and running contrary to an officer’s annual confidential reports carried no weight. The selection board’s decision against them be set aside and their promotion cases be considered on merit and in accordance with their service record.
Allowing the petitions, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui asked the board to consider the petitioners’ cases in accordance with the provisions of the Instacode and the guidelines contained in the superior court judgment and without being influenced by extraneous material.
The bench also issued notices to the establishment division and the Central Board of Revenue for Aug 15 in petitions moved by Syed Jalal Shah and Javed Iqbal Mirza, grade 19 officers of the customs service, for promotion to grade 20.
According to Advocate Dr Farogh Nasim, Jalal Shah was barred from promotion for three years under the efficiency and discipline rules but the bar was being treated as permanent. Mirza was found fit for promotion by the CSB but his promotion notification was withdrawn ‘because officers senior to him have not been promoted’. The counsel said in Mirza’s case, the board’s recommendation was already there while Shah’s promotion should be ordered to be considered by the board at its next meeting.
The bench also allowed former Javedan Cement managing director gratuity at the rate of two months’ salary for every year of service. Advocate Ghulam Mustafa Lakho informed the bench that the unified rules of the State Cement Corporation did not allow gratuity, which was regulated by every unit on its own.
Another division bench consisting of Justices Mohammad Moosa K. Leghari and Mohammad Afzal Soomro adjourned the hearing of a builder and developer’s plea against the resumption of land acquired by him for the construction of a huge housing project.
Additional Advocate-General M. Ahmed Pirzada alleged that 172 acres included in the project were initially barrage land, which could only be given on temporary lease.
