MALIK ZAWWAR HUSSAIN (MEMBER). -Muhammad Akram, Game Ins--pector, Forestry and Wildlife Department, Sialkot has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 in which he has impleaded the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Department as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal, he has prayed that the impugned order issued by the respondent vide endorsement No. SOE 11-2-16/79, dated 12-9-1981 be set aside and the appellant be allowed to continue as Game Inspector in the Game Department.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed as a Forester in the year 1963-64 in the Forest Department. Due to transfer of Canal Sides Plantation from Forest Department to the Irrigation Department, the Government ordered retrenchment of some of posts of field staff in the Forest Department The appellant claims that the post held by him was not only retrenched but he was also declared surplus by the Forest Department. As such he was absorbed as Game Inspector in the Game Department, because he fulfilled all the academic qualifi--cations prescribed for that post, and accordingly an order was passed by the Chief Conservator of Forests ride Letter No. 542/Ex-B-IV-22 dated 28-8-1979 addressed to the Conservator of Forests, Lahore. Thereafter the Government issued an order dated 12-9-1981 whereby the appellant was repatriated to his parent Department i.e. Forest Department (Forest Division Kasur) for posting as Forester with immediate effect. Hence the present appeal.
4. We have heard Mr. M. A Riaz, Advocate on behalf of the appellant as well as the learned District Attorney on behalf of the respon--dent. It has been argued on behalf of the appellant that the post of Forester against which the appellant was working in the Forest Depart--ment had been abolished, therefore, there was no justification of maintaining his lien in the Forest Department which in fact was not maintained and as such he could not be repatriated to that department. It has also been argued that there is no post available in the Forest. Department against which the appellant has been repatriated. It has also been argued that the order dated 28-8-1979 absorbing him in the Game Department was issued and acted upon, thus no locus poenitentiae was left with the Government to withdraw the same, because it had created certain right's in favour of the appellant. It has further been argued that the order of repatriation has been passed by Dr. Muhammad Ashraf, Acting Secretary, Government of the Punjab, Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Department who was only required to look after the current duties of the post in the absence, on ex-Pakistan leave of the Secretary. It has been submitted that the Government has not issued any Notification regarding the appointment of Dr. Muhammad Ashraf as Acting Secretary.
Controverting these arguments the Learned District Attorney has argued that the appellant was never absorbed permanently in the Wildlife Department against the post of Game Inspector and he was sent there on temporary basis as a Game Inspector. Since he was a confirmed Forestor, his lien remained in the Forest Department and was not terminated. It has also been argued that the Government has passed the valid order competently whereby the appellant and his other three colleagues have been repatriated to the Forest Department for posting as Forestors against the posts mentioned in the order. He has also submitted that since in the impugned order, the place of posting of the appellant has been mentioned so that there is no forced in the arguments of the learned counsel that there was no post available against which the appellant is to be appointed as a Forestor. With regard to the competency of Dr. Muhammad Ashraf to pass the impugned order, the learned District Attorney has produced before us a Notification issued by the Governor appointing him as Acting Secretary to Government of the Punjab. The learned District Attorney has also argued that the pcinciples of locus poenitentiae is not applicable to the facts of the present case, because the appellant was never absorbed perma--nently as Game Inspector.
5. We have given our anxious thoughts to the arguments -addressed by the parties and have also perused the record of the case carefully. The record shows that Deputy Conservator of Forests (Parks and Wildlife) vide his letter No. 17718/DCF/ (P & D) Estt. Dated 20-8-1979, informed the Secretary that besides others, five posts of Game Inspectors were lying vacant in his Department as already intimated by him vide his letter dated 24-5-1979. It is also stipulated in the said letter that the Game Inspector and the Assistant Game Wardens were to be absorbed purely on temporary basis and as soon as the ban on recruitment was lifted and suitable candidates fulfilling prescribed qualifications and experience are available, the persons absorbed against these posts would be repatriated to their parent Department. A copy of this letter was also endorsed to the Conservator of Forests, Lahore for his information. After exchange of correspondence, the Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab Lahore vide his letter No. 542,Ex-B-IV-22, dated 28-8-1979 Annexure `A' to the appeal, directed the Conservator of Forests, Lahore Circle, Lahore to relieve the appellant and two other Forestors for absorption in the Wildlife Department against the posts of Game Inspectors on temporary basis. It is also apparent from the record that although this order was issued on 28-8-1979, and the appellant was ordered to be relieved, yet the appellant continued as a Forester in the Forest Department till 10-9-1980 and was transferred from Lahore Forest Division to the office of the Deputy .Conservator of Forests (Parks and Wildlife) with effect from 10-9-1980 IF. N.) vide Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Forestry, Fisheries and Wildlife Department order endst. No. SOEII/2-16/79, dated 30-9-1980.
6. After giving the history of the case, as revealed from the record now we propose to deal with the arguments of the parties. The argument of learned counsel fur the appellant that the appellant was absorbed perma--nently as a Game Inspector and could not be repartriated to the Forest Department as a Forestor is without any substance. As narrated above the appellant was ordered to be absorbed as a Game Inspector purely on temporary basis and it was clearly stipulated in the order of the Deputy Conservator of Forests (Parks and Wildlife) dated 20-8-1979 referred to above that on absorption as Game Inspector the appellant would be liable to be repatriated to the Forest Department till the availability of suitable candidates with prescribed qualification and experience.
Since the appellant was never absorbed as a Game Inspector on permanent basis, so the Government was fully competent to pass the impugned order, and the principle of animals revertendi or the locus poenitentiae was available with the Government to repatriate him to his parent Department. With regard to other argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no post available in the Forest Department against which he has been repatriated, suffice it to say that the impugned order clearly shows that the appellant has been posted as a Forester, in Forest Division, Kasur against an available vacancy. Since the appellant was absorbed on temporary and provisional basis so his lien had to be retained in the Forest Depart--ment and it could not have been terminated unless and until he had been confirmed in the Game Department.
There is another aspect of the case as well. The ultimate order dated 30-9-1980 passed by the respondent clearly shows that the appellant was transferred from Lahore Forest Division to the office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests (Parks and Wildlife) w.e.f 10-9-1980. According to section 9 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act, every civil servant is liable to serve any where within or outside the Province in any post under the Government of the Punjab or the Federal Government or any other Provincial Governments or local authority etc. Provided that where the civil servant is required to serve in a post outside his service or cadre his terms and conditions of service as to his pay shall not be less favourable than those to which he would have been entitled, if he had not been so required to serve. Although originally the appellant was directed to be absorbed in the Games Depart--ment yet the final order dated 30-9-1980 clearly shows that he had been transferred. Thus, the impugned order has been competently passed strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in section 9 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act. Since this is an order of transfer simpliciter, so it does not confer any right upon the appellant to claim that he has been permanently absorbed as Game Inspector, with regard to the competency of Dr. Muhammad Ashraf, Acting Secretary to pass the impugued order, we have seen the notification issued by the Governor of Punjab in this behalf and are satisfied that he has been appointed as such by the order of the Governor.
7. In view of the above analysis we hold that there is no merit in this appeal which is dismissed accordingly. The parties shall bear their own costs.