' The ex parte decision dated 30th October, 1983 has been challenged in this appeal. The respondent appeared as his own witness and examined Hassan Ali retired S.E./R.T.L. The respondent stated that his junior namely Ramzan and Karim Bakhsh, etc. Were confirmed but he was ignored. P.W. 2 said that Karim Bakhsh was confirmed without being recommended by the Selection Committee but the respondent was ignored. He also stated that the respondent worked him and that his work and conduct were satisfactory. Both the witnesses said that the respondent and others were appointed not on the recommendation of any Selection Committee. It has been argued that no seniority list was produced by the respondent. The seniority list was with the appellant and not with the respondent. The appellant was given dates for evidence but neither oral nor documentary evidence was produced.
2. It has been argued that there were sufficient grounds for the non-appearance of the counsel. I am afraid such a contention could be made in an application for setting aside the ex parte decision in the learned lower Court and evidence produced on the point. There is nothing on the learned lower Court's file to the effect that there were sufficient grounds for non-appearance on 30th October, 1983. The learned lower Court was as such justified in believing the unrebutted evidence.
3. As a result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.