1. S. A. MAHMOOD (CHAIRMAN).-This is an appeal by Mr. Bashir Ahmed Mirza; Parole Officer under section 4(l) of the Civil Services (Appellate Tribunals) Ordinance, 1969, whereby he prays that the order, dated 26th May 1970, passed by Adviser/Deputy Secretary, Home Department, Government of West Pakistan, declaring Mr. Riaz Ahmed, respondent No. 2 to be senior to the appellant and promoting him to the post of Supervisor on that account, be set aside, and it be declared that the appellant is senior to the said, respondent.
2. Mr. Riaz Ahmed, respondent No. 2, was employed as a Probation Officer in the Reclamation and Probation Department in the lower scale of pay of Rs. 175-15-245/15-400 in July 1961. His designation was changed to Parole officer in the same scale on the reorganisation of the, Department of 21st February 1962, and he was allowed the benefit of the higher scale. (275-15- 320/20--500), from 1966 on completion of 'five years' service. Bashir Ahmed Mirza, appellant was appointed as Parole Officer in the higher scale of 275-15-320120-500, as he was M.A. in Sociology.
3. He joined the Department as Parole Officer on 16-9-1963. When the post of Supervisor fell vacant in the Bahawalpur Division on the reversion of one Muhammad Mian Ansari, the respondent No. 2 made a re--presentation for promotion as Supervisor, which was forwarded to the Public Service Commission in 1967, but he wag, found ineligible for promotion under the rules. Respondent No. 2, again represented in August 1967, and his representation was again turned down, On 12th October 1968 a circular memo was issued by the Home Secretary to Government of West Pakistan in which Parole Officers were bracketed with Probation Officers for promotion as Supervisors and seniority was directed to be maintained heretofore on regional basis instead of division wise. Along with this letter, a list of provisional seniority was circulated, in which the appellant was placed at No. 6, and respondent No. 2 at No. 10. Thus the appellant was shown senior as Probation Officer to respondent No. 2. On 18-4-1969, anotification was issued by the Provincial Gov--ernment, making the Parole Officers and Probation Officers equally eligible for promotion as Supervisors. On the issue of this notification, the case of respondent No. 2 for promotion as Supervisor was again referred to the Public Service Com--mission and he was promoted with the approval of the Public Service Commission as Supervisor on 4-6-1969. the appellant represented against his promotion in July 1969, and received the reply, dated 26th May 1970, which he in1pugns by this appeal. It may be mentioned that by another notification, dated 5-4-1969, seniority was ordered to, be maintained region-wise instead of on divisional basis.
4. The main question, which falls for determination in this case is, whether in, the letter of the Provincial Government, dated 26th May 1970: the appellant has-been treated as Junior to respondent No. 2. There is no such express indication in this letter, which is intended as a reply to the representation, made by the respondent against the promotion of respondent No. 2 as Supervisor. In, the seniority list of 1968, the appel--lant .was shown senior to respondent No. 2 as Parole Officer. Another seniority list is stated to have been issued in 1969, --but it was withdrawn by the Government. The factual position, therefore, is that the seniority list in the field is the provi-- sional seniority list of 1968, in which the appellant is shown senior to respondent No. 2, and there is do final determination of seniority of the parties by the Government, although the Department was required by the West Pakistan Civil Services (Appellate Tribunals) Ordinance, 1969, and the Punjab Civil Services (Appellate Tribunals) Ordinance, 1970 to publish a final seniority list. The duty to notify a seniority list under section 3 of the 1969 Ordinance has not yet been discharged. The same duty is cast by section 7 of the Ordinance of 1970. As the authority has fail to perform its duty we call upon the A Department to draw up a seniority list of Probation Officers and Parole Officers within three months and to send a copy thereof to this Tribunal. If the appellant feels aggrieved by the fixation of his seniority, he can move this Tribunal again.
5. This appeal will be treated as have been- disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.