Moazzam Hayat, Member.--Appellant Malik Ghulam Jilani an Assistant in the National Assembly, has filed the present appeal against the seniority list dated 12.02.2004 in which Respondents 3-21 have been shown senior to him. This list had been challenged by him in Appeal No. 569(R)CS/2004 which was decided on 14.12.2010. The judgment was recorded by Mr. Moazzam Hayat Member. A direction was issued that the claim of the appellant for seniority be placed before the Hon'ble Speaker of the National Assembly. Accordingly, the case was placed before the Hon'ble Speaker who rejected it on 08.02.2011. Hence this appeal.
2. The facts of the case have been given in detail in the aforementioned judgment dated 14.12.2010.
For the purposes of present appeal it is stated that the appellant was earlier in service of Ministry of Production. He came on deputation to the National Assembly on 13.12.1990 and was posted as Assistant to Deputy Speaker. On 19.02.1995 an order for his repatriation was passed but it was withdrawn on 20.04.1995. He was absorbed in the service of National Assembly with effect from 18.11.1995 vide order dated 21.11.1995. In the provisional seniority list dated 01.06.1999 he was placed at Serial No. 47. His departmental appeal dated 20.06.1999 was decided after three years. The final seniority list was published on 16.02.2004 which has been challenged by the appellant in the present appeal. His subsequent departmental appeal dated 24.02.2006 had not borne any fruit.
The matter had reached the Federal Service Tribunal in Appeal No. 569(R)CS/2004, mentioned above. A Bench comprising M/s. Ismail Hassan Niazi and Moazzam Hayat, Members issued a direction that the claim of the appellant shall be decided by the Speaker of the National Assembly in view of a clear direction issued by the Hon'ble High Court. On 08.02.2011, as mentioned above, the claim of the appellant for seniority was rejected by the competent authority. It is maintained by the appellant that he is entitled to seniority with effect from 13.12.1990 when he came on deputation to the National Assembly.
3. On the other hand, the respondents have stated that the appellant was entitled to claim seniority with effect from 08.11.1995 when he was absorbed in the service of National Assembly and was correctly placed junior to Respondents No. 3 to 21.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, the departmental representative of the respondents and have also perused the record.
5. The appellant had been absorbed in the service of National Assembly with effect from 08.11.1995.
He can thus claim seniority in the absorbed cadre with effect from the date of absorption. In this regard reference is made to Civil Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1993. It is stated in the preamble of Rules that these Rules are prospective in character and would supersede all practices, instructions and Office Memoranda in the sphere of fixing seniority of civil servants from the date of their promulgation and all other methods existing till then shall cease to be operative. The preamble was reproduced in 1990 SCMR 185. The seniority of the appellant was determined from 08.11.1995, after the enforcement of these rules.
6. The appellant has relied on PLD 1996 SC 771 in respect of his contention that the seniority of the appellant is to be reckoned from the date of his transfer to the National Assembly i.e. 13.12.1990. The ruling cited by the learned counsel relates to the Section Officers who had come on deputation from other departments and were absorbed subsequently to Office Management Group. For them specific rules were framed. The question as to whether or not they had opted for absorption was also held to be immaterial. In the present case the appellant was repatriated on 19.02.1995 which means that he was not taken on the permanent strength of the National Assembly. If his claim is allowed and he is considered to be a regular employee of the National Assembly with effect from 13.12.1990 i.e. when he came on deputation, the repatriation order dated 19.02.1995 shall be nullified.
This order cannot be nullified since it was legal. However, this order was withdrawn on 20.04.1995.
The result was that the appellant was absorbed in service of the National Assembly with effect from 08.11.1995 vide order dated 21.11.1995. His claim has to be governed and regulated by Civil Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1993. Rule-3 clearly says that the seniority shall take effect from the date of regular appointment to a service, cadre or post. The appellant had been appointed on regular basis in the service of National Assembly with effect from 08.11.1995 when he was absorbed permanently. As such, his seniority is to be determined from that date and not from any prior date.
7. In the above circumstances, we find no illegality in the order passed by the Speaker of the National Assembly. The appeal is dismissed.
8. There shall be no order as to costs.
9. Parties shall be informed.