MALIK ZAWWAR HUSSAIN (MEMBER). -Serat-un-Nabi, Zilledar has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act of 1974 against the order dated 3-12-1981 passed by the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Irrigation and Power Department whereby his represen-- tation regarding the seniority claimed by him against Kh. Nasir-ur---Rehman's respondent No. 1 was rejected.
2. By virtue of this appeal the appellant has prayed that the impugned order dated 3-12-1981 be set aside and the appellant be promoted as Deputy Collector with effect from February 1982 as per Rules applicable to him.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on the formation of Regional Cadre of Zilledars with effect from 1- 5-1982, the appellant anti respondent No. 'l were allocated to Lahore Region. The Governor of West Pakistan vide Notification No. 171/OSD/RW/68/286; dated 18-3-1-968, was pleased to order `creation of Multan Irrigation Region with immediate effect and to approve the adjustment in the jurisdiction of the various Irrigation Regions. By virtue of this Notification Lower Bari Doab Canal Circle was also transferred from Lahore Region to Multan Region. The respondent No. 1 got himself transferred from Lower Bari Doab Canal Circle to Upper Chenab Circle by the Superintending Engineer, BDC vide order dated 29-3-1968 which was duly approved by the Chief Engineer. Lahore. Thereafter the transfer of staff to Multan Region was ordered on 1-8-1968 vide Government of the Punjab, Irrigation and Power Department Order No. 17/47-SOIII (E)/66, dated 1-11-1968. Consequently the staff of L. B. D. Circle was transferred to Multan Region but before that the respondent had already been transferred to Upper Chenab Canal Circle, within the jurisdiction of Lahore Region. A seniority list of Zilladars of Lahore Region as' stated on 30-4-1968 was circulated in which the respondent No. 1 was shown senior, the appellant who came to know of the facts on 25-9-1979 that the respondent.
No. 1 had come to Lahore Region by the order of the Superintending: Engineer LBDC. He filed a representation against his transfer to Lahore Region which was ultimately rejected by the Government vide order dated 3-12-1981; hence this appeal.
4. We have heard Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sabir, Advocate do behalf of the appellant and Mr. Haroon-ur-Rashid Cheema,' District Attorney for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and Rana Abdul Majid; Advocate on behalf of respondent No. 1. We have also carefully perused the record of the Department. It has been argued on behalf of the appellant` that the respondent No. 1 stood allocated to Multan Region on the issuance of the Notification dated 18-3-1968 regarding the creation of Multan irrigation Region and the transfer of respondent No. 1 front Lower Bari Doab Canal Circle to the Upper Chenab Circle ordered by the Superintending Engineer vide Office Order No. 2509/13/46-E; dated 29-3-1968 and its consequent approval by the Chief Engineer, 1trigafi6n, Lahore Region vide even letter dated 5-6-1968 is illegal and without jurisdiction. He has submitted that it being an inter-region transfer, only the Government was competent to pass the said order: He has a1'so submitted that since the appellant has been transferred from Multan Region to Lahore Region so as per the policy letter issued by the S & G A Department vide letter No. S O XII (S & GAD)
12-39/62, elated 7-9-1962, the appellant should have been c3nsidered on deputation from Multan Region to Lahore Region and lie could '-riot be absorbed in Lahore Region. He has also submitted that as according to Annexure `H' the respondent No. I was permanently allocated to; Muttan Region and was transferred on' his own request consequently he should have been placed on the bottom of the seniority list of Zilledars, borne on the regional cadre of Lahore Region at that time.
5. On the other hand the learned District Attorney assisted by the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 has submitted that the policy' litter so relied upon by the appellant is not applicable in the present case and that the respondent No. 1 was never allocated to Multan Region because before allocation of the staff of LBDC issued vide order dated 1-11-1968, the Superintending Engineer with the approval of the Chief Engineer Lahore Region has transferred the respondent No. 1 from LBDC to Upper Chenab Circle. He has also submitted that by virtue of this appeal, the appellant has requested to set aside the orders dated 29-3-1968 and consequential order of the Chief Engineer, dated 5-6-1968 which are prior to the crucial date of 1-7-1969 as such this Tribunal has no juris-- diction to adjudicate upon the present appeal as provided in the section 4 (1)(c) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act. He has also submitted that the appeal is barred by time because in fact, the cause of action has accrued in favour of the appellant as against respondent No. I on 29-3-1968 which order was not challenged at the proper time.
6. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments of the parties and have carefully gone through the record of the case. We have observed that initially the respondent No. L was posted as Zilledar in LBD Canal Circle within jurisdiction of the Lahore Region when the Government of the West Pakistan was pleased to order the creation of Multan Region with effect from 18-3-1968 and the transfer of LBD Canal Circle to Multan Region. However, the staff of this Circle was allocated to Multan Region by the Government of West Pakistan, Irrig--ation and Power Department vide order dated 1-11-1968. By that time the Superintending Engineer issued an order on 29-3-1968 whereby the respondent No. 1 was transferred to Upper Chenab Circle and also endorsed its copy to the Chief Engineer. The Chief Engineer took an exception against this order and called upon the Superintending Engineer to quote authority under which the respondent No. T was allowed to join at Upper Chenab Canal Circle. The Superintending Engineer explained the entire situation vide its letter dated 6-5-1968. The Chief Engineer after deliberations and correspondence with the S. E. Was pleased to approve the transfer of respondent No. 1 from LBD Canal Circle, Sahiwal to Upper Chenab Canal Circle Consequently we hold that the respondent No. 1 was never transferred to Multan Region and he remained throughout in Lahore Region. The arguments of the learned counsel that Government of the Punjab vide order dated 1 1-12-1968 had directed that all the revenue staff including Dy. Collector who already stood allocated to any region should be deemed to have been permanently allocated to the Region, where the Circle where they were employed, had been transferred ; is of no avail to the appellant as order clearly shows that it is applicable only to the revenue staff who had already been allocated to any regions consequent to inter-region adjustment of circles as ordered by the Govern--ment of the Punjab vide Notification dated 18-3- 1968, because the respondent No. 1 was never allocated to any other region as a result of the creation of Multan Region. So far as the question of seniority is concerned, since we are of the considered opinion that the appellant remained throughout in the Lahore Region throughout, so his seniority has been rightly determined from the date of his continuous officiation in the grade.
7. After disposing of the case on merits, we would dwell upon the preliminary objections raised by the respondents regarding the maintain--ability of the appeal. Perusal of the pleading of the parties show that in fact the appellant has challenged the order dated 29-3-1968, passed by the Superintending Engineer and consequential order dated 6-8-1968 passed by the Chief Engineer by implication in para 9 of the appeal although these orders have not been challenged in the prayer.
As already decided by us in the case of Muhammad Ayub Rizvi (1982 PLC (C. S.) 238) and Malik Mohd. Jahangir etc. (117/1977) the appellant should have challenged these orders at that time. In view of section 4 (1) (c) of Punjab Service Tribunals Act, no appeal lies to us against an order or decision of a departmental authority made at any time before 1st July 1969 thus we have no jurisdiction to question the validity or otherwise of the said orders. Furthermore the appeal is not within time as against these orders. We may also observe that the appellant has prayed that he be promoted as a Dy. Collector with effect from February 1982. We are afraid that this matter is also outside the purview of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal as laid down under section 4 (i) (b) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act.
9. In view of the above detailed analysis, we hold that there is no force in the appeal on merits, as well as it is not maintainable being time barred and incompetent. As such the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.