S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN).-- Muhammad Aslam Khan, retired Officer of West Pakistan Forest Service Class II, has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunal Act, 1974, in which he has impleaded Secretary, Forestry and Wildlife Department and Secretary, Punjab Public Service Commission, Lahore, as respondents.
2. By virtue of this appeal he had prayed that in fulfilment of the commitment contained in the Government of the Punjab, Agriculture Department, Lahore, Notification No. SOFT. (R)11(7)/70, dated 18-1-1973, the respondents be directed to implement the advice of West Pakistan Public Service Commission with all the consequential benefits accrued to the appellant.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed as Forest Ranger in the Punjab Forest Department on 8-8-1937, after qualifying forestry course in higher standard from the Indian Forest College, Dera Doon. On 10-4-1962, former West Pakistan Public Service Commission, respondent No.2 advised that the appellant be inducted to W.P.F.S. Class I. However, respondent No.1 did not act on the said advice, The appellant made several representations to the higher authorities but he was only informed that his case for promotion was under their consideration but the advice of the Public Service Commission was never implemented.
4. We have heard the appellant in person as well as learned District Attorney assisted by the repsentative of the Department and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. The appellant who has argued his case in person has laid stress on the only point that when his case was recommended for appointment to Class I Service by the former West Pakistan Public Service Commission the Government was bound to accept the same and he should have been appointed in that service. On the other hand learned D . A . Who has adopted the para-wise comments submitted on behalf of respondent No. I that the appellant has not come with clean hands before this Tribunal as he had concealed the facts about his filing suit in the Civil Court against respondent No.1 which was dismissed by the Civil Judge Lahore on 27-4-1981. His appeal so filed against the said judgment was still pending in the Court of District and Sessions Judge Lahore and the case was fixed for hearing on 23-1-1982. It has been argued that in view of his unclean conduct his appeal should be dismissed on this ground alongwith regard to the merits of the case it has been submitted that Public Service Commission is only advisory body and the Government is within its competence either to accept the said advice or to ignore the same.
5. It was further submitted that the appellant's case for promotion as Extra Assistant Conservator of Forests was considered by the Punjab West Pakistan Public Service Commission during the years 1952, 1953, 1957 and 1959 in the light of Service Rules, 1941, but he was .Not considered suitable for promotion on the basis of his service record. According to the learned D.A. The appellant was superseded by the Forest Rangers who were junior but otherwise found suitable for the posts under the Service Rules. It was further pointed out that the appellant was promoted as W . P . P . S . (I I) for a period of one year on trial basis by the Chief Conservator of Forests on 5-4-1962 on the advice of the West Pakistan Publice Service Commission and was later on regularised by the Secretary to Government of-the Punjab, Agriculture Department.
6. We have. Given our anxious thought to the arguments so raised before us and after hearing and consulting the record, we find that the appellant writs never recommended by the Public Service Commission for Class I and the recommendations only for his promotion to Class II was taken into consideration and the appellant was as such promoted, vide C.C.F. Order No. 83-CCFWP, dated 5- 4-1962. The Punjab Public Service Commission did not recommend at any stage that the appellant be promoted to W . P . F . S . I .
7. We have also looked into the record and find that the case of the appellant was duly considered during the years 1952, 1953, 1957 and 1959 and he was not considered fit for promotion on account of his service record.
8. In view of the above facts on the record as well as the law settled on this issue that even if there would have been a recommendation by the Public Service Commission in favour of the appellant, respondents were not under obligation to accept the same, we proceed to dismiss the appeal as being without any merits However there will be no order as to costs.