ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C.P.No.D-4799 of 2013
____________________________________________________________
Order
with signature of Judge
Present : Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Mr. Justice
Arshad Hussain Khan
Syed Kamran Haider
Rizvi..
..
.
.Petitioner
Versus
Province
of Sindh and 03 others
.Respondents
Date
of Hearing:- 05.10.2016
Mr.Imran
Hussain, advocate for the petitioner
Mr.Abdul
Jalil Zubedi, AAG
Muhammad
Ali Mazhar, J: Case
of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Constable in Sindh Police Service
on 10th April, 2002 and at the time of appointment, he was 26 years
old. In response to an advertisement published by Sindh Public Service
Commission for appointment to the post of ASI (BPS-9), the petitioner also
applied for the post. It is further stated that the respondent No.2 on behalf
of the respondent No.1, issued a Notification for allowing relaxation upto the
age of 15 years in all vacancies of government departments likely to be filled
during 1st July, 2012 to 30th June, 2013. The petitioner
appeared in written test but on 06.09.2013 he received a rejection letter.
Reason of rejection was overage by 01 year 06 months and 15 days on closing
date i.e., 11.07.2013. However, in the same rejection letter, it is clearly
mentioned that applicant/petitioner may file appeal with reasonable grounds
duly supported by documentary evidence against rejection order. After receiving
rejection letter, the petitioner on 17.09.2013 filed an appeal to Chairman,
Sindh Public Service Commission. Copy of appeal is available at Page-29 with
acknowledgement of Regional Office, SPSC, Karachi. The petitioner also made
request to Chief Secretary and Inspector General of Police Sindh for relaxation
of age and both applications are also available on record but learned counsel
submits that neither appeal has been decided by SPSC nor request has been
considered by Chief Secretary and/or I.G Sindh. Learned AAG does not confront
rejection letter as well as filing of appeal to SPSC and or applications so
made by the petitioner but he argued that age relaxation does not apply to
police field force, however, to the extent whether appeal has been decided by
SPSC or not, he is also of the view that if appeal was preferred in terms of
rejection letter then same should have been decided by SPSC.
As
a result of above discussion, the Chairman, SPSC, is directed to decide appeal
of the petitioner available at Page-29 within one month after providing ample
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Petition alongwith pending
application is disposed of.
Copy
of this order be transmitted to learned AAG for compliance.
J
U D G E
J U D G E