' S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-- Messrs Muhammad Azam, Nisar Ahmad Muhammad Shabbir, Haq Nawaz and Shahid Ali (Appeal No, 209/156 of 1983), Muhammad Iqbal, Khalid Pervaiz, Muhammad Iqbal son of Abdur Rehman, Naseer Ahmad (Appeal No, 211/161 of 1983), Muhammad Khan (Appeal No, 213/143 of 1982) and Muhammad Ashraf (Appeal No, 219/162 of 1983), have filed these appeals under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, in which they have impleaded the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Food Department, Lahore, Director of Food, Punjab, Lahore and the Deputy Director Food Sargodha Region, Sargodha, as respondents.
2. By virtue of these appeals they have prayed that the impugned orders, dated 24-4-1983 as well as 9-5-1983, passed by respondents Nos, 1 and 2 be set aside and the order, dated 28-4-1979 and 9-4-1981 passed by respondent No,3, be maintained.
3. As the facts as well as point of law involved are identical in nature in all these appeals, we will dispose of all these appeals by our this single judgment.
4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants were initially recruited as Chowkidars in the Food Department and vide orders dated 28-4-1979 and 9-4-1981, they were promoted from Chowkidars to the Posts of Foodgrain Supervisors, passed by the Deputy Director Food, Sargodha Region, Sargodha. Later on at was found that the said orders were in violation of Recruitment Rules, 1962, therefore, the Government cancelled the said promotion orders and reverted the appellants back to their original posts. The appellants did not file any representation to the next higher authority. As the reversion orders were passed by the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Food Department, therefore, they straightway have filed these appeals before this Tribunal.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned District Attorney and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance.
6. It has been urged on behalf of the appellants that they were duly promoted by the competent authority who was Deputy Director Food, Sargodha Region, in their case and thus the Secretary or the Director Food, was not authorised to revert them, without issuing any show-cause notice against them. It has been further submitted that the principle of locus poententia, will come into display in their favour, as the appellants performed their duties excellently and have a vested right created in them as the competent authority in their case, was the Deputy Director Food Sargodha Region, only.
7. On the other hand learned District Attorney has submitted that the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants are misconcieved on the ground that the Deputy Director Food who in fact passed the orders in violation of Recruitment Rules made it clear to the appellants that their promotions were purely as a stopgap arrangements with the clear indication that the said promotion would not confer any right for their retention as Foodgrains Supervisors. According to the learned District Attorney that as the promotions were in violation of Recruitment Rules, 1962, the Director Food or the Secretary Food, Government of the Punjab, were fully competent to strike down the same and no notices were necessary to be served on the appellants.
8. We have given our anxious thought to the arguments so advanced by the parties and find that all these appellants, who were initially Chowkidars serving in the Food Department, were promoted by the Deputy Director Food as stopgap arrangements, as explained by him in his letter to the higher authorities when called upon to do so, that as the Food Procurement work at the relevant time, necessitated the filling of these vacancies, therefore, without conferring any right on the appellants, he made provisional arrangements. We have also satisfied ourselves that for full three years the Deputy Director Food, Sargodha Region failed to get these promotions of the appellants, approved from the Department Promotion Committee and did not even bring this matter to the notice of the Secretary Food Department for relaxation of rules etc. In favour of the appellants. This being the situation, we have no alternative but to accept the arguments of the learned District Attorney that all what was done by the Deputy Director Food, was in complete violation of Recruitment Rules, 1962, as well as promotions were on stopgap basis and nothing else.
9. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned orders passed by the Secretary/Director of Food Punjab, were legal as well as justified as nobody could be promoted in the manner the appellants were promoted. We also hold that the appellants have no vested rights in the promotes cadre and can be reverted back to their original posts by the competent authority.
10. The result is we dismiss all these appeals as being without any merit. There will be no order as to costs.