' S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-Khushi Muhammad Khalid ex-Deputy Director (Agriculture) has filed an appeal before us against the order of Secretary, Agriculture Department dated 9th January, 1980 whereby he has been retired from service after completion of 25 years of service qualifying for pension and other benefits under clause (ii) of section 12 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974. By virtue of this appeal the appellant has prayed that he may be re-instated in service and the impugned order of his retirement be set aside.
2. We have heard the learned counsel at length and have perused record. We have carefully attended the arguments advanced by the learned District Attorney as well as Malik Azam Rasul the learned counsel for the respondent.
3. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that he had to his credit unblemished record of service and had various assignments involving responsibilities in 32 years of his service. According to appellant he was being recommended for promotion when suddenly he was faced with this situation of his retirement as mentioned above. He has alleged ground of mala fide stating therein that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 have by collusion among themselves have retired him from service although there was no justification for the same. We have got no dispute with the meritorious performance of the appellant and his brilliant educational career but in face of promulgation of Provisional Constitution Order of 1981 article of the same which has once for all ousted the jurisdiction of this Tribunal to entertain the appeal against retirement of a person who has completed his 25 years of service and has been retired by the competent authority. In this case the appellant has completed more than 25 years of service and has been retired by a competent authority, therefore the impact of Article 13 is fully applicable in his case. With regard to mala fide it is sufficient to say that there is nothing on the record to show any malice against the competent authority except some vague and general reference at page. 7 para. (a) of' the grounds of appeal.
' It is easy to allege mala fide but very difficult to establish the same whereas in this case the appellant has restricted himself to allegation only and has failed to show anything on the record to prove the same.
4. In the light of above, the appeal stands abated and is dismissed accordingly. However, the appellant if so advised can file a review petition before the competent authority a right granted by Article 13 (ii) of the Pro' isional Constitution Order of 1981 to him.