SC grants leave to appeal on service tribunal’s judgment in police officers seniority case

The Supreme Court (SC) has granted leave to appeal filed by the Sindh government against a judgment of the Sindh service tribunal with regard to seniority of police officers in Sindh.

The Sindh government and others had challenged the Sindh service tribunal order issued on June 6, 2022, pertaining to seniority of police officers who were appointed in early ’90s.

The AIG establishment and AIG legal had filed a joint statement to show that all respondents in the petition had been duly served by the department because they were in service except few.

Imtiaz Ali Solangi advocate appeared on behalf of some petitioners and requested the court to allow him to argue on behalf of petitioners.

A two-member bench of the SC headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar observed that from the perusal of grounds mentioned in the application, the request was granted as the counsel was fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case.

The apex court observed that crucial points involved in the petitions were that certain police officers were appointed in March 3, 1990 but they were discharged from service on February 24, 1991 and later they were appointed afresh on October 15, 1991.

The SC observed that the basic question involved in the matter was whether their seniority would be reckoned from the date of their initial appointment or date of their fresh appointment, which was made after discharge from their service.

The apex court also observed that one of the issue of the case was that the final seniority list was compiled in 1996 whereby seniority of many police officers were reckoned from the date of their initial appointment and whether this aspect had been rightly considered by the tribunal and what had been the effect of the decision of the aggrieved officials to not challenge the seniority list of 1996.

The apex court granted leave to appeal and directed that appeal stage paper books be prepared on the available record.

The SC observed that the parties shall be liberty to file additional documents if they desired so. The apex court directed its office to fix the matter for hearing in the next session.