S. A. NUSRAT, J.--These appeals, brought by special leave of this Court, are directed against a common judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 30-3-1977 whereby 12 seniority appeals of the appellants were dismissed.
2. The relevant facts involved in these appeals are that pursuant to the recommendation of the Central Ministry of Law made to the then Government of West Pakistan in 1962 that ad hoc arrangement be made to clear backlog of civil cases pending in the civil Courts, the Provincial Government created 29 extra posts of Civil Judges out of which 16 were allocated to the present Province of the Punjab. The said posts were to be filled in without following the procedure of competitive test. In consultation with the West Pakistan Public Service Commission and the West Pakistan High Court with the required qualification of three years' practising experience as an Advocate or five years' experience as Pleader. The applications were invited for such posts in March, 1963 by the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, through advertisement in the Press. The appellants applied for such jobs whereupon five of them were recruited in June/July, 1963 and other eight in 1964. The appellants therefore came to belong to the category of Civil Judges who were appointed against extra posts which were specifically created for the purpose of clearing the backlog of cases pending in the civil Courts. It may be mentioned that contemporaneously in November, 1963, regular recruitment to West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) was also made in accordance with the West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962 in the prescribed manner through competitive test.
3. Since the appellants' appointment was made for specific purpose as aforesaid they were not treated to be the members of the West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) for which they did press subsequently. Ultimately, on 13-8-1968, the Governor of West Pakistan decided in principle that the appellants be absorbed in West Pakistan Civil Service (Judicial Branch). The said order, however, was silent as to their seniority, vis-a-vis the existing members of the service. The Governor of West Pakistan thereafter issued a Notification No. S. O. R. III-1-40/69 dated 28-2-1970 providing for the absorption/regularization of the adhoc appointees whose appointment to any service or post had not been regularized for any reason, which provided that such persons were deemed to have been regularly appointed to such service or post with effect from the date of the notification provided they fulfilled the conditions laid down therein, inter alia, of their suitability being approved by the Public Service Commission. Para. (b) of the said notification reads as under :- "the persons whose appointment is regularised under the provisions of these orders, shall count their seniority in the service, grade, cadre or post, to which they are so regularly, appointed with effect from 1 January, 1970."
4. Leave to appeal from the above judgment of the Service Tribunal was- granted on 14-6-1977 to examine the contention of the appellants with regard to the interpretation of rule 9 of the West Pakistan Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962 read with rule 5 thereof
5. The contentions raised before us by the learned counsel for the appellants are almost the same as were pressed before the learned Service Tribunal, examined in detail and were rejected.
6. In the first place, it was contended that notwithstanding the use of the word 'ad hoc' in the appointment letters of the appellants, they were regular appointees to the P. C. S. (Judicial Branch)
Cadre from very beginning and, therefore, they could not be placed junior to the respondent Civil Judges. Reference was made to the Government instructions contained at page 103 of O & M Manual Volume I and the instructions printed at page 558 of the Manual of Administration Volume IV. The learned counsel also invited our attention to the definition of 'ad hoc' appointment in the Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 and rule 22 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974 providing for the method of ad hoc appointments. It was contended that although regular selection of the Civil Judges was also made under the West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962, the appellants were not substituted and had continued to be in the service. The appellants were not required to deal with the backlog of cases alone but had also been doing regular work. It was asserted that since the appellants were appointed by the rule making authority, their appointment, even if not warranted by rule 5 of the West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962 was covered by a method of appointment which was of general character applicable to large number of cases and, therefore such method was liable to be construed as part of the 1962 Rules or an amendment thereto. The appointment of the appellants, therefore, was regular and valid. Reliance was placed on cases of Akhtar Ahmad and others v. Government of West Pakistan (PLD1971SC846) and Mian Muhammad Afzal v.
Government of the Punjab (1982SCMR408). It was also contended that the appointment of the appellants having been made for an indefinite period, their appointment for all intents and purposes was to be treated as regular appointment. In this connection learned counsel relied upon the cases of Abdul Majid Shaikh v. A4ushaffe Ahmed and another (PLD 1965 SC 208), Province of Punjab another v. Tajammal Hussain (1973 SCMR 517) and Miss Nasim Jehan Naun v. The General Manager, P. W. R., Lahore (PLD 1968 SC 112).
7. The case on behalf of the private respondents was argued by Mr. Muhammad Farooq whose arguments were adopted by Mr. Tanvir Ahmad Khan, It was contended on behalf of the respondent Civil Judges that it was clearly borne out from the record, which was examined by the Learned Tribunal, that the appointment of the appellants was made for the specific purpose of clearing the backlog of cases on purely temporary basis with no guarantee of their absorption into the servicest which was to be determined, by the Government in future on the basis of satisfactory record of their service.
8. The learned counsel referred t6 the advertisement of the Lahore High Court dated 10-3-1963 inviting the applications for the post of Civil Judges to be appointed purely on temporary basis for the purposes of disposing of the arrears of judicial work.' The attention was particularly invited to paragraph VI of the advertisement as respects "Future Prospects" which showed that the applicants for the job were not to form part of the P. C. S. Judicial Cadre and had to wait for their absorption as members of the service "on terms and conditions to be determined by the Government." The said advertisement was made in accordance with the instructions contained in the letter No. SP-5-3/62-50 X dated 4-3-1963 of the Government of Punjab addressed to the Registrar of the West Pakistan High Court, Lahore, on the subject "ad hoc recruitment of judicial officers as a special measure." It was clearly stated in the said letter that :- "As the appellants are purely temporary, there would be no question o; their absorption in the West Pakistan Civil services (judicial Branch) and no such mention be made in the advertisement."
Reference was made by the learned counsel to the judgment in the case of Ghulam Sarwar v.
Province of Punjab (1982 SCMR 46) wherein it has been laid down that adhoc appointment could not become regular simply by lapse of time. Reliance was also placed on the case of M. N. Rizvi v.
Province of Punjab Pakistan (1982 SCMR 46) and Zain Khan Khalil v. Government of N.-W. F. P. (PLD 1982 SC 104).
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through, the elaborate judgment of the learned Service Tribunal, we are to agreement, with the learned Tribunal that it is the intention of the competent authorities at the time of making the appointment of the appellants which constitutes the crux of the dispute.
10. There is no denying the fact that the 29 posts of Civil Judges were created on the recommendation of the Central Law Ministry to the Government of West Pakistan, out of which 16 posts had fallen to the share of the present province of the Punjab, specifically for the purpose of clearing the backlog of cases pending in the civil Courts in the Province. Under the requisition of the Provincial Government dated 30-3-1963 to the We. Pakistan Public Service Commission the posts were described pertaining to unclassified Civil Judges recruit on ad hoc basis" and as "purely temporary on ad hoc basis and "terminable on one month's notice from either side." In the advertisement dated 10-3-1963 whereby the High Court, of West Pakistan had invited applications, the posts were shown to"purely temporary", and "created for disposing of the are work". As respects future prospects, it was clearly mentioned that the officers who cleared the arrears of work assigned to them and earn a satisfactory record of service may be considered for absorption in the P. C. S. Judicial Branch Cadre on terms and conditions to be determined by the Government. In the subject and body of the letters of appointment also, the posts were shown,' to be temporary and ad hoc and terminable on one month's notice either side. The last condition under the heading "General" in the letters of appointment is particularly relevant which is reproduced herein :- "Government reserve the right to alter or interpret any of the forgoing conditions in a manner less favourable to you. In case you accepts all the foregoing terms and conditions in its entirety, you shot.; contact the Registrar, High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, posting orders."
From the above condition, it was made clear that the proposed appointment-: were not to be governed by the service rules in force and were to be regulate by the terms and conditions mentioned in the advertisement, which too could be interpreted by the Government in a manner less favourable to the appointees.
11. The learned Tribunal had had the occasion to examine the record of the case and has given the finding that there was no indication available from the record that the said posts at any stage formed part of the regular cadre or service. Further it was found by the learned Tribunal that at no stage the Government had determined to have appointed the appellants the cadre posts. The determination by the Government, as envisaged in paragraph VI of the advertisement of the High Court dated 10-3-1963, was done for the first time by the Governor of the Province as per notification dated 20-2-1970 on the strength whereof the appellants came to be absorbed in the regular cadre of Civil Judges with, effect from 1-1-1970 as per notification dated 16-12-1974. In the circumstances, the appellants who were kept outside the main stream of the service cadre of Civil Judges were right not held entitled to claim seniority over the respondent Civil Judges who were appointed on regular basis according to rules.
12. Examined in the background of the above facts, the cases referred to by the learned counsel for the appellants are clearly distinguishable and are of no assistance to the case of the appellants.
The word ad hoc has been interpreted by this Court in the case of Mian Muhammad Afzal v.
Government of the Punjab and others as meaning "for a particular object".
"Adhoc appointments truly so-called being not in accordance with the Rules applicable to the service cannot receive either recognition or protection by reference to any of the Rules because they do no imply appointments to the service as such. Such appointments being outside the purview of the rules cannot for any purpose be treated a E conferring a benefit under the Rules. It follows that, if the appellant and some of the respondents were 'truly ad hoc appointees for certain period they cannot on the basis of Rules claim their seniority from that date whether it was continuous or not."
Since the appellants were kept outside the regular cadre until their absorption into the service, they could not claim seniority against the contesting of respondents from the date of their adhoc appointment as held in M. N. Rizvi's case.
13. Lastly, it is to be seen whether the case of the appellants is- covered by rule 9(b) of the West Pakistan Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1962 which reads as under :- "9. Seniority.-The seniority inter se of the members of the Service in the various grades thereof shall be determined :-
(a) ---------------------------------..
(b) in the case of members appointed otherwise with reference to the dates of their continuous appointment therein provided that if the date., of continuous appointment in the case of two or more members of the Service is the same, the older officer, if not junior to the younger officer or officers in the next below grade, shall rank senior to the younger officer or officers."
14. The above rule provides for the determination of seniority inter se of the members of the service in the various grades whether appointed initial recruitment or otherwise. However, since it has been found that the appellants were not members of the service until their absorption into the service as per order of the Governor Punjab, dated 16-12-1974 with effect from 1-1-1970, the Rule on the face of it is not attracted as it calls for the determination of the seniority inter se of the persons who are already members VI' the serving.
15. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeals merit no consideration and are dismissed.
However, while parting with the case, we would like to observe that since the Government has chosen to promote some of the Civil Judges as officiating Additional District and Sessions Judges (Gr-18) vide Notification No. CI. 2.90/70 (P-11), dated 25-9-1975, it is hoped that the' Government will do justice to such appellants who deserve promotion on the basis of their record of service. With this observation, the appeals are, dismissed with no order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.