INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, QUETTA vs FIDA MUHAMMAD R — 2022 PLC(CS) 1501 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, QUETTA VS FIDA MUHAMMAD R. 9(6)---Reinstatement in service---Violation of principles of natural justice---Vested right to appointment---Locus poenitentiae, doctrine of---Appointment letters were cancelled through an omnibus order without disclosing any reason, providing any opportunity of hearing or issuing any show cause notice---Legality---In the present case all the appointment letters were issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police with the approval of the Inspector General of Police after fulfillment of and contentment of required codal formalities including the recommendation of Departmental Selection Committee, constituted by the competent authority---All the respondents/employees were appointed on different posts in BPS-1 as admissible under the Balochistan Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 2009 ('the 2009 Rules') against the existing vacancies---Appointment letters did not reflect that all the appointments were made for one District only, but names of other various districts were also mentioned---No convincing or persuasive raison d'Ãªtre was brought forward to assume the ground of debarring the respondents from selection in view of the rigors of Rule 9(6) of the Rules, which did not seem to have been violated in any way while appointing the respondents on the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee---Nothing was articulated to allege that the respondents by hook and crook managed their appointments or committed any misrepresentation or fraud or their appointments were made on political consideration or motivation or they were not eligible or not local residents of the district advertised for inviting applications for the job---Despite that, an omnibus order was issued by the DIG Police for cancellation of appointments without disclosing any reason for cancellation or withdrawal and without issuing any show cause notice or providing any opportunity of audience to the respondents---Appointing authority had, therefore, violated the principle of natural justice and due process---Respondents were appointed after fulfilling codal formalities which created vested rights in their favour that could not have been withdrawn or cancelled in a perfunctory manner on mere presupposition and or conjecture which was clearly hit by the doctrine of locus poenitentiae---Appeal was dismissed with the observation that some strenuous action should have been taken against persons involved in the selection and appointment process who allegedly violated the rules rather than accusing or blaming the low paid poor employees of downtrodden areas who were appointed after due process in BPS-1 for their livelihood and to support their families.

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, QUETTA vs FIDA MUHAMMAD R — 2022 PLC(CS) 1501 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC