Pleas against transfer of senior police officers from Sindh dismissed

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday dismissed petitions filed against the Establishment Division’s notifications with regard to the transfer of five senior police officers from Sindh.

An SHC division bench comprising Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Adnanul Karim Memon observed that the service rules of the police service provide for the transfer and posting of PSP officers to different provinces, and that the competent authority can withdraw any such officer of the federal government before the expiry of their tenure limitation.

The court observed that the rotation policy of the police service cannot restrict the process of the competent authority from withdrawing any civil servant or PSP officer from the provincial governments at any time on administrative grounds or valid reasons.

The bench observed that service matters are essentially between the employer and the employee, and that it would be for the competent authority to decide in accordance with the service rules, so there was no question of public interest involved in such matters as portrayed by the petitioners.

The court observed that the transfer and posting of officers falls within the ambit of the Service Tribunal Act, which states that the tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction in respect of matters relating to the terms and conditions of the service of civil servants, including disciplinary matters.

The bench observed that police officers are not arrayed as petitioners or respondents in the petition, on whose behalf a grievance has been shown through the petition by strangers.

The court observed that the petition cannot be granted under the guise of public interest litigation, more particularly in the service matters of civil servants. The bench observed that the service law provides remedies for the officers who are transferred prematurely, ex-facie in violation of the rotation policy.

Rashid Bohio and other petitioners had challenged the transfer of senior police officers from Sindh to other provinces as well as the rotation policy of the PSP and PAS officers framed by the federal government.

They submitted that the transfer policy is structured in terms of the notification of August 5, 2020, and that the impugned notifications with regard to the transfer of grade-20 officers in Sindh police is violative of such policy.

The federal government had issued a notification with regard to the transfer of police officers Fida Hussain Mastoi, Iqbal Dara Dayo, Irfan Ali Baloch, Qamar-uz-Zaman and Munir Ahmed Sheikh from Sindh to the Motorway Police and Punjab.

The petitioners submitted that there are other senior officers against those who have been transferred under the impugned notifications, so this primarily and substantially violates the policy.

Their counsel Salahuddin Ahmed submitted that the federal government had issued a notification on August 5, 2020 that governs that policy in relation to the transfer and posting of police officers.

Relying upon Rule 5(c) of the principles of the policy that regulates the rotation of officers serving for long continuous periods at one geographical location, and rules 13(a), (c) and (f), the counsel submitted that police officers who have served for 10 years or more in any of the governments will be transferred to other governments in three phases spanning over six months each, starting with the officers who have the longest tenures in a government.

He submitted that according to the seniority list, there are quite a few officers who have served more than the length of those who have been transferred through the impugned notification.

He also submitted that in all fairness, the officers who are ranked one to seven should have been taken into consideration as they have served between 17 and 22 years, instead of the rest of them who have served less than those who are available on the initial ranking of the list.

The counsel submitted that the policy has been violated, and that no discretion vests with the federal government to flout their own policy in this regard. He submitted that these officers having a pay scale of grade-20 and below may be transferred on rotation without discretion, while on account of some exigency, the government may alter such rotation policy, but it is in respect of officers above grade 20.

The court was requested to declare the impugned transfer of police officers contrary to the Rotation Policy 2020, and to direct the Establishment Division to reframe the rotation policy as required in collaboration with the provincial governments.

The federal law officer opposed the petitions, submitting that constitutional petitions except for a writ of quo warranto, private persons have no locus standi to call into question the transfer and posting of PSP officers or civil servants from the federation to the provinces, as there are a series of judgments of the Supreme Court laying down the principles to be followed.

He submitted that there is a clear bar under Article 212 of the constitution, so the petitioners ought not to have a concern with transfer and posting matters, which is an exclusive domain of the competent authority to make transfers and postings in the exigency of service.