1. SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-The relevant facts out of which this appeal has arisen briefly stated are that Muhammad Rafiq Khan appellant and Muhammad Hassan Khan respondent were both employees in the Electricity Department of Azad Kashmir Government as Line Superintendent when later was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer Electricity vide Government Order No. 211719-24, dated 23-4-76. The appellant feeling aggrieved by the promotion of the respondent No. 2 has lodged the present appeal under the Azad Jammu & Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1975 in which it has been prayed that by setting aside the impugned order the respondent No. 1 be directed to promote the appellant as Assistant Engineer Electricity in place of respondent No. 2.
2. The appellant has sought the above-stated relief on the following grounds:-
(i) That appellant is better qualified as compared to the respondent No. 2 inasmuch as he holds the Diploma of Associate Engineers awarded by the West Pakistan Board of Technical Education on the basis of his three years training course in Electrical Technology at Government Polytechnic Institute, Sialkot whereas the respondent No. 2 besides being non-Matriculate has not received any technical training in any school or Institute.
(ii) That the appellant was senior to the respondent No. 2 at the time of his promotion as the said respondent before 15-9-66 was holding the post of Meter Inspector which was a lower grade post than that of Line Superintendent against which the appellant was working since 14-4-66 and that even as Line Superintendent he was placed in National Pay Scale No. 11 on account of being Diploma holder whereas respondent No. 2 was getting National Pay Scale No. 9 for being unqualified.
(iii) That the impugned order has been made in violation of the Government orders prescribing District wise quota in the service according to which the appellant being the resident of District Poonch was entitled to be promoted.
(iv) That the Minister for Works had promoted the appellant to the post of Assistant Engineer Electricity much before passing the impugned order but his order of promotion was not implemented and he was not permitted to join the said post by the Departmental Authorities and thus ignoring his order of promotion respondent No. 1 has mala finely promoted respondent No. 2.
3. The ex parte proceedings were taken against respondent No. 1 who did not appear though duly served. The respondent No. 2 has contested the appeal and put in written statement in which it has been pleaded that the appeal is incompetent due to non joined of Chief Engineer who is a necessary party. On merits it has'' been contended that the appellant's contention -of his being senior to respondent No. 2 is factually incorrect and on the contrary he was quite senior to the appellant at the relevant time. It is also the case of respondent No. 2 that he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer Electricity on the basis of seniority-cum-merits while the appellant was ignored due to his bad service record.
4. We have heard the parties and have also perused the relevant record of the case. In our view we need not go into the merits of the case as this appeal is not entertainable by this Tribunal. The right of appeal before this Tribunal to the civil servant has been provided by section 4 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1975. It would be advantageous to reproduce the relevant portion of the said section which reads as under:-- "4. Appeal to Tribunals.-Any civil servant aggrieved by any final order, whether original or appellate, made by a Departmental Authority in respect of any of the terms and conditions of his service including disciplinary matter may, within thirty days of the communication of such order to him or within six months of the establishment of the appropriate Tribunal, whichever is later, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal."
5. As would appear from the above it is only against the final order of the Departmental Authority made in respect of terms and conditions of his service that an aggrieved civil servant can come in appeal before this Tribunal for the redress of his grievance and not otherwise. As is clear from the contents of the impugned order itself, it is not a final order of the promotion of the respondent No. 2 to the post of Assistant Engineer Electricity who has been only promoted on ad hoc basis subject to the confirmation by the Public Service Commission. The ad hoc appointment is quite distinct from that of permanent one and is only a stopgap arrangement liable to be terminated on the appointment of a person on regular basis in accordance with rules governing such appointment. It will be appropriate here to reproduce the definition of ad hoc appointment as given in section 2 (a) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants Acts, 1976 which governs the terms and condition of a Civil Servant. It reads as follows:- "Section. 2- (a) `ad hoc appointment' means appointment of a duly qualified person made otherwise than in accordance with the prescribed method of recruitment, pending, recruitment in accordance with such method."
6. In accordance with the above definition an ad hoc appointment to a post is purely temporary in nature lasting till such time as the permanent one is made and confers no right whatsoever in the appointee to hold it indefinitely. On the contrary civil servant appointed to a higher post on ad hoc basis is liable to reversion to his lower post or grade without notice under section 11 of the Azad Jammu & Kashmir Civil Servants Act.
7. In this view of the matter the impugned order cannot be termed as a final order of the Departmental Authority as the respondent No. 2 has been promoted on ad hoc basis to the post of Assistant Engineer Electricity subject to the confirmation by the Public Service Commission on whose recommendation final order will be made regarding the appointment to the post which the respondent No. 2 is presently holding on ad hoc basis. After coming to the conclusion that no finality is attached to the impugned order we have no hesitation in holding that ad hoe promotion of the respondent No. 2 has not given rise to any cause of action to the appellan to prefer this appeal before this Tribunal. His appeal appears to be pre--mature, the right of which will only accrue to him when on the recommenda--tion of the Public Service Commission final order in respect of the appointment to the post held by the respondent No. 2 presently is made on regular basis by the Government respondent.
8. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is not maintainable which is accord--ingly dismissed as incompetent with no order as to costs. The parties shall be informed of this order.