1. ' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioner, a civil servant, who has been unsuccessful before the Service Tribunal, seeks leave to appeal, under Article 212(3) of the Constitution against the judgment of the Service Tribunal dated 22-8-1982.
2. ' The petitioner joined service in WAPDA on 12-9-1963 and was promoted to the next higher post on 16-6-1976 which was regularised from 30-12-1976 and has been working in N.P.S.
17. The petitioner has been clamouring to get his seniority settled as an Agriculture Graduate on his entry into the service in 1963. He had not been successful and moved the Service Tribunal for that purpose. The Department took up the plea as follows:-- "In April, 1976, the Authority (WAPDA) vide Office Order No, WW-P7/75-EI/1977 dated 19-4-1976 (copy enclosed as Annexure-D) decided that the persons having Master's Degree in the requisite subject are eligible for appointment as Junior Agronomist. As Mr. Asghar Munir had passed M.Sc. (Agri) during the period i.e, in 1975, he thus fulfilled the requisite qualifications and being the senior most as Soil Survey Assistant he was promoted as Junior Agronomist with effect from 30-12-1976.
3. ' Prior to his promotion as Junior Agronomist, he never requested for fixation of his seniority in the lower cadre. His seniority as Junior Agronomist was correctly fixed from the date of his promotion i.e, 30-12-1976."
4. ' The Tribunal rejected his appeal by observing as follows:-- "As a result of the foregoing analysis, we do not find any merit in the appellant's assertion that his seniority be determined with effect from 12-9-1963 which is his prayer. His seniority reckons in Grade-17 only with effect from 30th December, 1976 or with effect from 16th June, 1976 should the WAPDA so decide."
5. Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner wanted his seniority in the junior grade to be settled so as to claim the benefit of it in the senior scale which he was enjoying.
6. No civil servant has a right to get a seniority in the junior grade settled because that is not relevant nor does the non-determination of that seniority necessarily aggrieve him. It is only when the non- determination of that seniority affects his seniority in the higher grade that he can claim such determination while attacking the present seniority. This the petitioner could not possibly do because the rules applicable to N.P.S. 17 posts referred to by both the Department as well as the Tribunal do not give him benefit of his joining the junior grade in September, 1963. On that view of the matter there is no question of law which may require further examination. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.