Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: IQBAL HAIDER SHAH VS Respondent: GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJABHonorable Justice S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN
1984 P L C (C
1984 P L C (C. S.) 1051
[Service Tribunal Punjab]
Present: S. Abdul Jabbar Khan, Chairman, Malik Zawwar Hussain and Abdul Hamid Chaudhry, Members
Syed IQBAL HAIDER SHAH
versus
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
Case No. 233/1339 of 1981, decided on 28th November, 1982.
Civil service
---Seniority‑Held, cannot be granted ipso facto unless and until person or persons likely to be affected are impleaded through a regular appeal before Service `tribunal.
Syed Jamshed Ali for Appellant. Haroon‑ur‑Rashid Cheema, District Attorney for Respondent.
JUDGMENT
S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN, (CHAIRMAN). ‑Syed Iqbal Haider Shah, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded Government of the Punjab through its Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department Punjab Secretariat, Lahore, as respondent.
2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that he may be placed in N. P. S.‑17 and same may be given effect from 10th March, 1979 when a number of junior colleagues were promoted in . N. P. S.‑17 and has also claimed seniority over them.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant joined Village‑Aid Department of the Government of West Pakistan in 1956, as Project Supervisor, received training in various institutions and continued as such. He was promoted in 1967, after about 11 years of service on ad hoc basis as Development Officer, Basic Democracies. However, he was reverted after a period of 4 months of his promotion as Development Officer and again continued as Supervisor. This state of affairs ended when he was again promoted as Development Officer in his own pay and scale. This promotion was regularised vide Notification, dated 10th June, 1974. The appellant made a number of representations against this alleged injustice done to him and when nothing came out, he has filed this appeal before us. Hence this appeal.
4. We called for the comments when we admitted this appeal to regular hearing and during the course of pendency of this appeal on 3rd May, 1982 representative of Department Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad S. O. appeared and stated that the appellant had been allowed pay in N. P. S. 17 w.e.f. 10th March, 1979 the date of his regularization and has also been regularized in N. P. S. 17. In view of the above situation the case should have been concluded, but as the learned counsel for the appellant wanted to verify the statement of the representative of the Government in consulta tion with his client, therefore, the case was kept pending. However, this controversy now stand concluded and the appeal of the appellant has borne fruit with respect to .the claim of pay as well as regularization. With regard to the seniority the same cannot be granted ipso facto unless and until the person or persons likely to be affected are impleaded before us.
5. In view of the above, the appeal has borne fruit with regard to the claim of the appellant for the grant of N. P. S.‑17 and back date of regularization of service and the same is disposed of accordingly. With regard to the claim of the seniority, we have already observed that the same cannot be bestowed upon him unless and until he files a regular appeal and impleads the person or persons to be affected for the same.
There will be no order as to costs.
M. Y. M. Appeal allowed.