RAWALPINDI, Nov 19: The Lahore High Court (LHC) Rawalpindi bench here on Wednesday directed a federal counsel and the law officer of Pakistan Air Force (PAF) to produce the orders of chief of air staff about the dismissal of four warrant officers.
Justice Fazal-i-Miran Chauhan directed the law officer to produce the orders of PAF chief or that of an authorised authority in the court on November 25 regarding the dismissal of four low rank officers to determine whether or not a competent authority had ordered their ouster.
Making Ministry of Defence and PAF chief respondents the four petitioners through their legal counsel, Haider Hussain, maintained that they had served in the air force for over 25 years and were removed from service on corruption and embezzlement charges. They said in their writ petition that they were not given proper opportunity to defend themselves against the charges and this amounted to gross violation of natural justice.
Their lawyer said in the court that they were removed by the deputy chief of air staff, an incompetent authority, and not by the chief in violation of PAF Act 1953. The federal counsel maintained that the petitioners had been removed through a lawful order by a competent authority.
Meanwhile Justice Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah of the LHC directed the additional inspector general (AIG) legal to appear in the court in person and explain the legal position of eight police constables who had been denied promotion despite passing the required examinations.
The court directed an assistant advocate general (AAG) to ensure the presence of AIG in the court on December 3 to explain the legal position of Qamar Abbas Shah and seven other constables, who had lodged a petition in the court regarding their promotion as head constables.
Mohammad Bashir Khan, the lawyer of the constables, told Dawn that the petitioners first passed the category A examination for the promotion and later they also cleared the B category test in 2006 but their names were not put in the B list, a list of candidates considered for promotion by the district police officer (DPO) Attock in 2007.
Making IG, AIG, DPO Attock respondents, the petitioners had sought their names to be put in the B list and a standing order of IG issued in 2001 be set aside.
The IG in his order had declared that if a candidate could not pass the category B examination in three attempts he would be considered failed in category A. The petitioner had failed to pass the B category examination in three consecutive attempts in 2005 but passed it next year in first attempt.