22
J. S. Lindgren (M.P.)
23. b. R. Hobson (M.P 24 J. Battley (M. P.)
vide 52680 CR
attached
Mr.Meyer.
15-11-48
At (6) in this file is a petition forwarded on behalf of the pre-war Inspectors of the Hong Kong Police Force, in which one of the matters complained of is the introduction of new entrants into the seniority roll above fully established officers. To this extent their case resembles that of Mr. Davies upon which you recently minuted and I have therefore examined this petition again in the light of the advice you gave in that case.
12
It is true that, when given the option of rejoining the reorganised Police Force, the officers petitioning here were misled, as was Mr.Davies, on the question of seniority. The difference however seems to me to be that these men are complaining not that they were misled on this material point when called upon to decide whether to rejoin the Force, but that the Hong Kong Government had no right to alter the seniority roll as it did. They are not seeking to alter their decision to remain in the Force, m
The
ground that they did not at the time know of the alteration to the seniority volk.
It is not in doubt that the Hong Kong Government were in fact entitled to place new entrants in the seniority roll where they thought fit and I think therefore that the advice which you gave in the case of Mr. Davies need not affect the decision here. I should however be grateful for your views on this point.
Blackard
30.11.48.
time
W. Redford
Yes I agree case differs from wat in hie
Savios & That I stüket
-
in regard to his
M Sidebotham
above
Draft A for your
case
'grievance in this case of twr.
im
will not
Любиир
muinute
not apply
2/12
here.
In view of H Meyer's munite
COASTA
cove now
come
forward
without amendment.
RR.
2/12
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.