2. The respondent was Junior Clerk in the Punjab Road Transport Board and was reverted to the post of fuel pump attendant and transferred to Islamabad. He challenged the said order on the ground that he being direct appointee as Junior Clerk could not be reverted to the post of fuel pump attendant and that his reversion was punishment and since he was not charge-sheeted and no inquiry held against him the reversion was illegal.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent had become surplus therefore instead of being terminated was given alternative post of fuel pump attendant.
This argument is no tenable inasmuch as it i: not mentioned in the order of reversion that he had become surplus, there is no other document on - the record R suggesting that the respondent had become surplus. The order of reversion was therefore illegal and was rightly struck down by the learned lower Court.
Nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent on 14-11-82, therefore] he was proceeded ex parte.
As a result of observation made above I dismiss the appeal ex parte.