1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--This appeal by Malik Muhammad Azam and four others is by leave of this Court.
2. ' On 16-5-1977, the Punjab Civil Servants (Pay Revision) Rules, 1977, by means of Notification No,FD- PC-2-1/77 were made applicable to the employees of the Local Councils Service of all categories in all respects as provided in the same Rules. The amendment in the schedule to the said Rules was notified on 7-9-1980 as a result of which the Superintendents (Non-Secretariat Office) in Grade-11 were placed in Grade-15 w.e.f, 1-9-1980. The appellants claimed the benefit under the amending notification of 7-9-1980. It was denied to them. The Provincial Government's reply was that the notification was not automatically applicable unless formally adopted by the Government in the Local Government and Rural Development Department. The appellants by means of a Constitution petition challenged the Government's stance before the Lahore High Court. Their petition was dismissed in liminc.
3. Leave was granted to consider that the main rules of 1977 having been made applicable, the subsequent amendments were applicable automatically to the appellants who were entitled to the benefit of the notification dated 7-9-1980.
4. ' During the course of arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, it was brought to our notice that appellants Malik Muhammad Azam and Shamas Din were already enjoying NPS-16.
5. With regard to the remaining three appellants, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that matter had not yet been finalised. In support of this he drew our attention to the report submitted by respondent No,2 in the Constitution Petition filed by the appellants. The relevant portion of the report is to the following effect:- "...The Mayor, Municipal Corporation Rawalpindi moved the case of the petitioners through the Commissioner Rawalpindi Division for grant of NPS-15 but before any final order could be passed by the Government in the matter, they chose to file this Writ Petition."
6. It was submitted that it is thus obvious that the final order has not yet been passed. This position is not challenged by the learned counsel for the appellants. It is, therefore, clear that their case is yet to be finalised.
7. ' For the foregoing reasons this appeal has no merit. It is dismissed with no order as to costs.