' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- This appeal, by leave of the Court, is directed against judgment dated 27-12-2002, passed by the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal, Peshawar (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Appeal No,1315 of 1999.
2. The respondent, Syed Zafarmand Ali, was appointed as Information Officer (BPS-16) in the Information Department, on the recommendation of N.-W.F.P. Public Service Commission; vide Notification dated 26-6-1983 issued by the Government of N.-W.F.P. Information Department. He assumed the charge as Information Officer on 4-7-1983. On the request of the Home Department, the Information Department of the Government of N.-W.F.P. By Notification dated 24-3-1985 placed his services at the disposal of the Directorate of Civil Defence N.-W.F.P., for further posting as Publicity Officer (B.P.S.-16) until further orders. However, by another Notification, dated 2-6-1985, Information Department recalled the respondent from the Civil Defence Directorate. The Home Department did not relieve the respondent and requested the Information Department to withdraw their Notification dated 2-6-1985. Since the respondent did not relinquish the charge, therefore, he was placed under suspension by order dated 12-10-1985 issued by the Secretary to the Government of N.-W.F.P., Information Department.
3. Subsequently, the Information Department inquired from the Home Department as to whether the respondent was willing to be absorbed in the Civil Defence Directorate on regular basis. The Directorate of Civil Defence, by letter dated 14-10-1985, recommended for the absorption of the respondent by letter dated 14-10-1985. Therefore, the Home Department, being the borrowing department, informed the Information Department accordingly. The respondent also gave his written option on 13-10-1985 for his absorption in the Civil Defence Directorate of N.-W.F.P. The Secretary, Information Department, by order, dated 10-11-1985 transferred the services of the respondent from the Information Department to the Home Department. It was further stated therein that on his transfer, the respondent would sever every connection with the Information Department and would have no right to claim his lien/and or his seniority or repatriation to the Information Department/Directorate. The Home Department issued Notification dated 12-2-1990 whereby the services of the respondent were placed at the disposal of the Inspector-General of N.- W.F.P., for his further posting as Public Relations Officer, against a vacant post of D.S.P., in his own pay and grade (BS-16).
4. However, the borrowing Home Department issued Notification dated. 25-5-1998 whereby the respondent was repatriated to his parent department i,e, Information Department, and in his place one Ch. Riaz Ahmed, Assistant Director (BS-17) of Information Department was posted as Public Relations Officer. Therefore, the Information Department vide letter dated 2-7-1998 took up the matter with the Secretary, Services and General Administration Department, N.-W.F.P., seeking his views/advice as to whether the Home Department could send back the respondent and whether the respondent had been permanently transferred to the Home Department/Civil Defence Directorate. The Services and General Administration Department (Regulation Wing) informed the Information Department by letter, dated 28-7-1998 and U.O. Dated 30-9-1999 that the respondent had been permanently absorbed in the Home and Tribal Affairs Department vide order, dated 10- 11-1985 issued by the Information Department. The Home Department by another Notification dated 29-8-1998 continued the services of the respondent as Public Relations Officer to Inspector- General o1 Police , N.-W.F.P., against the post of a D.S.P. In the Police Department and Ch. Riaz Ahmed, Assistant Director was repatriated to the Information Department. The Law Department gave its opinion dated 9-4-1999 that the respondent would continue to remain the employee of the Information Department which was responsible for his services. By another Notification dated 30-4-1999, the Home Department directed Ch. Riaz Ahmed to continue as Public Relations Officer to the .Inspector-General of Police and the respondent to work as Assistant Public Relations Officer to the I.-G.P., N.-W.F.P., against a post of Inspector, in his own pay and scale (BS-16).
5. However, the respondent filed Service Appeal No,1315 of 1999 on 27-8-1999 before the Tribunal against the order, dated 30-4-1999 and for fixation of his seniority from date of his first joining in the Government service with future elevation in career. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent by the impugned judgment dated 27-12-2002 whereby the orders dated 10-11-1985 and 3-6-1998 of the Information Department and order, dated 30-4-1999 of the Home Department were set aside. The respondent was held entitled to all the benefit of seniority and promotion in his parent department i,e, Information Department. The appellants were directed to consider the respondent for grant of upgradation/promotion to BS-17 with effect from 29-12-1991 i,e, the date from which officers junior to him in the Information Department were promoted. It was further directed that the Home Department was at liberty to post the respondent as P.R.O. To the N.-W.F.P.
Or to repatriate him to the parent department if his services were no longer required. Hence this appeal, by leave of the Court, by the Government functionaries.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants vehementally argued that the respondent was permanently transferred to the Home Department by order, dated 10-11-1985 issued by the Secretary to the Government of N.-W.F.P., Information Department and his lien was also validly terminated from the Information Department. Thereafter, he could not claim his seniority or repatriation to his parent department. It was next contended that the order dated 10-11-1985 was passed with the concurrence of the Home Department after the respondent had given his option in writing for absorption in the Civil Defence Directorate Department on regular basis. Thereafter, the respondent could not be repatriated to the Information Department with whom he had severed all his relations including the lien or seniority. It was lastly submitted that for all practical purposes and legal consequences. The respondent had become a permanent employee of the Civil Defence Directorate under the Home Department.
7 . On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent vehemently argued that the respondent had been sent by the Information Department not of his own choice but on the request of the Home Department for being posted as Publicity Officer (BS-16) in the ' Civil Defence Directorate and that he was never absorbed by the borrowing department on regular basis.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the relevant record of the case as received from the respective departments. Admittedly, the respondent was transferred by the Information Department to the Home Department in his own pay and grade.
There is nothing on record to indicate that the competent authority in the Home Department had ever passed any order for permanent induction of the respondent in the Civil Defence Directorate.
No such offer of appointment by transfer was ever made nor were any terms and conditions of such appointment of the respondent settled after he had shown his willingness for absorption in the Civil Defence Directorate. Therefore, there was no occasion or justification for the Information Department to terminate his lien in his parent department. Under the rules, the lien of a permanent civil servant cannot be terminated even with his consent unless he has been confirmed against some other permanent post. Reference may usefully be made to the case of Syed Sajjad Hussain v.
Secretary, Establishment Division, Cabinet Secretariat, Islamabad and 2 others 1996 SCM R 284 and Mazhar Ali v. Federation of Pakistan through the Secretary Establishment Division, Cabinet Secretariat and 2 others 1992 SCM R 435.
9. We also find from the record that even the temporary post of Publicity Officer (BS-16) of the respondent in the Civil Defence Directorate was abolished by the Finance Department of the N.- W.F.P. Vide their letter dated 5-1-1995 addressed to the Secretary Home and Tribal Affairs Department, N.-W.F.P. The record does not show that any departmental promotion committee was constituted as required by rules 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 of the N.-W.F.P. Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1975, (published in the official Gazette dated 25-4-1975) to make a recommendation as to the suitability or otherwise of the respondent for his absorption in the Civil Defence Directorate. The Information Department seems to have acted with unholy haste in passing the order dated 10-11-1985 thereby placing the services of the respondent at the disposal of the Home Department on permanent basis by terminating his lien. Unfortunately, the respondent, by his conduct, also made himself persona non grata at every place he was posted. In our opinion, the impugned judgment of the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity. This appeal does not involve any question of law of public importance as contemplated under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan so as to warrant interference by this Court.
10. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal which is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. It is however, made clear that the respondent shall stand repatriated as Information Officer to his parent Information Department and that he shall be considered for promotion on merits and in accordance with law.