' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of the Federal Service Tribunal whereby the order of the departmental authorities declaring him senior to respondent No,5 was set aside.
2. The petitioner was confirmed as Steno-typist with effect from 1-4-1956 in the office of the General Manager, C.T.R., Lahore. Respondent No,5 was also confirmed as Steno-typist in the same office with effect from 19-2-1962. In 1970, the petitioner was selected for appointment as Stenographer in the Directorate of Coaxila Cable (Construction), T&T, Lahore. He was never confirmed in this appointment, for, we are informed that the posts in the said Directorate were filled by taking officials on loan from the other offices in the Department. However, that may be, he reverted to his own department on 30-6-1980 and was appointed as Stenographer with effect from 1-7-1980.
3. Respondent No,5 who stayed on in the parent department was promoted as Stenographer with effect from 25-3-1975 and was given selection-grade on a permanent basis with effect from 22-7- 1980.
4. After reversion to his parent department, the petitioner made an application that he should be given selection grade as he was senior to respondent No,5. His representation was rejected whereupon he filed an appeal before the Assistant Deputy Director-General. By an order, dated 2- 5-1982, the Assistant Deputy Director-General accepted the petitioner's claim to seniority over respondent No,5. Apprehending that the acceptance of the appeal would lead to his deconfirmation as a selection-grade Stenographer, respondent No,5 filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal accepted the appeal and set aside the order of the Assistant Deputy Director-General. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
5. In support of this petition it is contended that in his parent department he was senior to respondent No,5 as Stenotypist. As he held that post on a permanent basis he retained a lien on that post while he was serving in the Directorate of Coaxila Cable (Construction). As his case for promotion was not considered by his parent department when he was serving in the Directorate he would not lose his seniority over respondent No,5. This aspect of the matter was not considered by the learned Tribunal.
6. The contention raised by the petitioner needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs,1,000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.