Justice (R) Sayed Zahid Hussain, Chairman.--Aggrieved of seniority list circulated on 23.07.2012 that he has been shown juy the departmental authority.
2. The case of the appellant is that with the abolition of Circle Office and absorption of the posts in FC, AJK & GB Circle and PMG Northern Punjab Circle, Rawalpindi, he was entitled to seniority from the date of continuous appointment to the grade in view of the policy letter dated 07.01.2002 that the "seniority of affected officials is to be determined according to date of continuous appointment to the grade. In other words from the date of regular appointment in the relevant grade/cadre." It is the grievance of the appellant that the said criteria was not followed in preparation of the seniority list and his appeal/representation for correction of the seniority has not been decided or responded to. He thus prays that the respondent-department may be directed to consider the appeal/representation of the appellant and make necessary correction in the seniority list.nior to the private respondents, Sher Muhammad, the appellant herein has filed this appeal, under Section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, qua the same and that his departmental appeal has not been responded b
3. Official respondents have filed paradise comments. The sum and substance whereof is that the seniority list issued in the year 2001 had become final as the appeal of the appellant there-against was rejected; the seniority list having attained finality cannot be challenged now, which had been prepared in accordance with law/rules.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Standing Counsel and the learned counsel for the private respondents have been heard.
5. The seniority of a civil servant is one of the conditions of his service and the appointing authority is obliged under Section 8 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973 to prepare the seniority list of such service, cadre or post, as the case may be. In the instant appeal, the grievance made by the appellant is about the seniority list as of 01.01.2012 circulated through letter dated 23.07.2012 with the direction to the officials concerned to point out any "discrepancies", if any, within 30 days thereof. The appellant objected and filed objections thereto seeking correction thereof as per his representation dated 15.08.2012. The stance of the department and the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the seniority had attained finality in the year 2001 overlooks the fact that the seniority list undergoes changes with the flux of time. It was held in 1986 SCM R 68, Ch. Nazar Muhammad and another v. Government of Punjab and 38 others that "seniority lists are liable to change from time to time on account of new inductions into service and various grades thereof.
There is no finality to the list. It has however to conform to the rules for the time being applicable to its preparation, maintenance and revision. The seniority list of 1957 will not of its own force be decisive of the correctness and validity of the subsequent lists." Thus there was no fixity of seniority for all future times. Moreover, the department had itself issued the seniority list, (subject matter of the appeal), in the year 2012, inviting objections thereto. It was not final. Neither the objections filed by the appellant have been decided in accordance with law nor a final seniority list there-after is claimed to have been issued. Needless to mention that the seniority list (Annexure-A) is nothing but a provisional one as the same had to be finalized on considering the objections/representations there-about. It is thus that we have considered it appropriate to dispose of this appeal with the direction to the competent authority in the department to consider the objections/representation of the appellant and issue final seniority list as per law and rules.
6. In view of the above, the competent authority is directed to finalize the seniority list in accordance with law. The needful will be done within a period of three months.
7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.