' The case of the present petitioner alongwith similar other cases was dealt by Civil Services (Appellate) Tribunal, Punjab, Lahore, on a number of occasions. For the first time in its order dated 24th July, 1972 it observed : "We have pointed out in other cases that paragraph 17 (c) of the Integration Circular causes hardship and inequity in service in departments like Agri. And Industries Deptts. Where posts are sanctioned from year to year. And remain temporary even though they have existed for many years. It was evidently to remove this hardship that the S & G.A.D. In their letter No, SOX 11 (S&GAD)-2- 195/64, dated 19th December, 1964 printed at page 655 in the Estt. Mannal, Vol. III, directed that annual review should henceforth be made of all temporary posts, which have been in existence for a period from 3 to 5 years for converting them into permanant posts. If this is done, the hardship caused to a promotee can be removed by his substantive appointment with retrospective effect against a post, converted into a substantive post. We therefore, recommend in terms of the S&GAD letter that the question of converting temporary posts in the Industries Deptt.
Into permanent posts be examined since they have been in existence for more than three to five years, and retrospective confirmation made against those posts so that the inequity that person appointed earlier does not remain junior to a person who is appointed directly later."
' Thereafter the matter was taken up the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore vide Annexure-B of writ petition. The Tribunal observed :- "Operating within the limitation of law imposed upon this Tribunal, we direct the department that they should comply with the earlier direction of the Tribunal in case of Islam Hassan Khan and then determine the seniority of the incumbents first in class II and then, if necessary, re-adjust their dates of promotion in Class 1 junior. The appeals are disposed of with the above observation with no order as to costs.
' Parties be informed accordingly."
2. It is the case of the petitioner that these orders of the Tribunal were never assailed by the Department/Government in appeal, revision or even in this Court. Thus they had become final vis- a-vis the Government and the Government was bound to follow them. In spite of the lapse of more than 7 years these directions of the Tribunal have not complied with no building force in law to oblige the Provincial Government to coral with it" and that the Service Tribunal "had no power or authority to is any such direction of mandatory character".
4. During the arguments, learned counsel questioned the valid of the directions given from time to time by the Tribunal as also Government's amenability to such orders. He further argued that least the Government was not bound to accept the recommendations ma by the Tribunal.
5. It appears to us that the appellant's basic grievance is against to orders directions of the Tribunal in view of the provision of Article 212 the Constitution, such grievance can neither be raised before nor adjudicated upon by us. Nothing has been produced before us to support t' contention that the Government was not bound to carry out the direction of the Tribunal. As regards the implementation of "recommendation if any, we find that the impugned judgment does not speak of at "Recommendations". The concession made by the learned Assists Advocate-General, as also the operating part of the judgment, relates it to "directions" given by the Tribunal.
6. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in this app which we accordingly dismiss in limine.
Appeal dismissed
3. Mr. Khalilur Rahman Ramdey learned Assistant Advocate-General, who is representing the respondents submits that the Government would comply with the directions of the Service Tribunal issued 3pm time to time as referred to above provided reasonable time is lowed to the Government. This request is accepted. It is accordingly ordered that the Government would implement the directions given in the orders of the Tribunal referred to above within a period of three-months.
' This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.