Sheikh Mehmood Ahsan, Senior Clerk, Office of the Deputy Commissioner. Bahawalnagar has made this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 wherein he has requested for setting aside the reversion order dated 2-9-1976, passed by respondent No. 1 and order dated 26- 4-1982, passed by respondent No. 2. He has impleaded the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar and the Commissioner, Bahawal--par Division, Bahawalpur as respondents in this appeal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was working as Senior Clerk in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar. He was promoted and appointed as Assistant in the Land Reform; Branch on purely temporary basis against the ex-cadre post vide, order dated 16-5-1972 of Deputy Land Commissioner, Bahawalnagar. The appellant worked as such and he was appointed vide order dated, 13th July, 1976 as Assistant in the Secretariat of Punjab Land Commission, Lahore on deputation. He joined on this post but was reverted back to the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar, his parent Depart--ment, on his request, w.e.f. 25th August, 1976. On his reversion from the Punjab Land Commission, Lahore, the appellant was allowed to resume his duties as Senior Clerk, his original post by Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar vide his order dated 2-9-1976. Being aggrieved of this order, he made an appeal to respondent No. 2 I e.
Commissioner, Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur which was rejected vide his order dated 26-4- 1982. Hence this appeal.
3. I hive heard the arguments of the parties. The learned counsel for the appellant has taken the plea that the appellant was promoted as an Assistant on 16-5-1972. He was sent on deputation in July, 1976 to the Punjab Land Commission at Lahore and on his reversion in August, 1976, he should have been allowed to continue as Assistant in the Land Reform Branch, the post from which he went on deputation, and he should not have been posted as Senior Clerk. Thus, putting the appellant as Senior. Clerk instead of Assistant was illegal and unlawful on the part of the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar and has prayed that his promotion as Assistant from 16-5-1972 be upheld and he be allowed to continue as Assistant from that date. Controverting these arguments, the learned District Attorney submitted that the promotion as Assistant of the appellant was not a regular promotion in the Ministerial District cadre, but it was appointment in the Land Reforms Branch ; that too on purely temporary basis against the ex-cadre post which was done by the Deputy Land Commissioner, Bahawalnagar and not by the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar.
The learned District Attorney has further argued that the appellant was thus appointed as an Assistant in Punjab Land Commission, against the post sanctioned by the Punjab Land Commission, and has been lawfully repatriated to his parent Department on his original post of Senior Clerk. Thus, there is no cause of any grievance and no injustice has been done to the appellant.
4. I have given my anxious thought to the arguments of the parties, I have also gone through the decision, on the appeal of the appellant, by the learned Commissioner, Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur, announ--ced on 26-4-1982, who considering the pros and cons of his appeal has decided that "As regards the promotion of Mehmood Ahsan as Assistant it is very clearly mentioned in the office note as well as in the order that he was promoted on purely temporary basis against an ex-cadre post for which the consideration of seniority was not involved. Evidently his promotion as Assistant did not entitle him to any out of turn promotion as Assistant in his original cadre". "There is no force in the contention of Mehmood Ahsan that as he' had been promoted as Assistant on, 15-5-1972 in the ex-cadre in Land Reforms he could be considered and promoted in his original cadre of Deputy Commissioner's Office. He had been explicitly promoted in ex-cadre which did not give him any benefit as regard his promotion in the original cadre the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar".
5. I agree with the above decision of the learned Commissioner, Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur and find that the appellant was appointed as an Assistant in the Land Reforms Branch on purely tem--porary basis against they-cadre post which did not give him any right for considering this promotion in the regular cardre in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar. On his repatriation from the Punjab Land Commission, Lahore, the appellant was correctly allowed to resume his duties as Senior Clerk on his original post by the Deputy Commis--sioner, Bahawalnagar. Thus, there is no illegality and no injustice has been done to the appellant.
6. Keeping the above analysis in view, I hold that there is no force in the appeal which is dismissed as such.
There will be no order as to costs.