1. ' MUNAWAR ALI KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---In this appeal the appellant Ghulam Muhammad Memon has made the following prayer:- 'It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the Honourable Tribunal may be pleased to;
(a) admit the appeal and call for from the Respondents relevant record of the case;
(b) set aside the impugned Notification No,SOF (V)-2(243)/89, dated 14th September, 1989 (marked 'F') so far as the Appellant is concerned;
(c) order that the appellant continues as W.R.O. With all back benefits;
(d) pass any other/further order which the Honourable Tribunal deems fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case; and
(e) award cost of the appeal to the appellant."
2. ' The above prayer was made in the context of the background which may be summarized as follows. After termination of his earlier appointment of Food Inspector, the appellant began his Government service afresh as Godown-Keeper with effect from 25-8-1958. Soon thereafter he was promoted as Food Inspector on 19-10-1958, superseding a number of Godown-Keepers, who were senior to him. However, he joined the promotional post late on 25-10-1958, as the intervening period of six days was taken to relieve him from the lower charge. During the period between the said date and 16-5-1972 the appellant was reverted thrice and so also promoted for equal number of times.
3. The appellant filed objections against the seniority list issued on 1-5-1967, which were overruled and such intimation was communicated to him on 19-6-1973. He preferred the appeal against the rejection of his objections which was accepted by the Director, Food, vide his Order No, S.O.F(1)-Ad- 173, dated 11-12-1973 and he was assigned seniority immediately below Mr. Muhammad Yousuf.
4. Accordingly, revised seniority list was issued on 19-12-1973 on the basis whereof, the appellant was promoted as Assistant Food Controller. Aggrieved by his promotion Mr. Ghulam Muhammad Yousufani made representation to the Director, Food, who vide his order No, S.O.F(1)-4(14)/70, dated 1-2-1974 cancelled his earlier order dated 11-12-1973. This order was challenged by the appellant in his representation made to the Food Minister but the same was ultimately rejected. He then submitted petition to the Chief Minister on 16-4-1974. Since no reply was received by him for 90 days, the appellant filed Appeal No, 114/1974 before this Tribunal on 1-8-1974, which was dismissed vide judgment of this Tribunal dated 20-7-1977.
5. ' On the appellant's fresh petition dated 30-12-1985, his case was reconsidered and vide Secretary, Food Department's order dated 17-5-1987 his petition was accepted and the Director Food's order dated 1-2-1974 was declared invalid. Consequently, revised seniority list was issued on 3-8-1987 and on the basis of that seniority list, the appellant was promoted as Ward Rationing Officer vide Notification dated 12-4-1988. Meanwhile M/s. Khushi Ram and Abdul Malik Abbasi preferred appeal to the Chief Secretary against the seniority list issued on 3-8-1987. As they got no response within 90 days they filed appeals before this Tribunal. Pending decision of the Tribunal, the Chief Secretary upheld their appeals directing that the appellants' seniority in the cadre of Assistant Food Controllers be fixed from 9-6-1981 on which date he was inducted in the said cadre by promotion.
6. Consequently, the Secretary, Food Department's order dated 17-5-1987 was withdrawn vide Food Department's Notification dated 21-6-1989 and revised seniority list of Assistant Food Controllers/Assistant Ward Rationing Officers as stood on 21-6-1989 was issued, wherein the appellant was assigned position at serial No,35. The appeals of M/s. Khushi Ram and Mr. Abdul Malik Abbasi, pending before the Service Tribunal were dismissed as withdrawn as they had become infructuous. In the light of the change in his seniority position, the appellant was reverted from the post of WRO by order dated 14-9-1989, which he has impugned in the present appeal, after exhausting the usual departmental remedy.
7. ' We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and with their help went through all the documents relevant for disposal of the appeal.
8. ' As is clear from the appellant's prayer, he was aggrieved by the Food Department's,-order, dated 14th September, 1989 whereby he, alongwith three others was reverted from the post of WRO. Had it been a case of reversion simpliciter, we would not have intervened because as provided in section 12 of the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973; a civil servant appointed to higher post or grade, ad hoc or on temporary, or officiating basis, shall be liable to reversion to his lower post or grade without notice. But on careful perusal of the reversion order, it would be noticed that the reversion was made in consequence of the revision of the seniority list in the light of the decision of the Chief Secretary as contained in the Food Department's Notification dated 21-6-1989. It would therefore be necessary to examine implications of the Chief Secretary's said decision. The notification reflecting the Chief Secretary's order reads as under: "In pursuance of the orders of the Chief Secretary (Competent Authority) upholding the Appeal of Mr. Abdul Malik Abbasi, Assistant Food Controller, Hyderabad Region, this Department's Order No,SOF(v)-9(28)/78, dated 17-5-1987 is hereby withdrawn/set aside, whereby Mr. Ghulam Muhammad A. Memon is assigned seniority in the rank of Assistant Food Controller from the date of his promotion as Assistant Food Controller i,e, 9-6-1981 above Mr. Araz Muhammad Baloch and below Mr. Muhammad Ismail Mangsi, Assistant Food Controller.
(2) The revised seniority of Assistant Ward Rationing Officers/Assistant Food Controllers is accordingly being issued separately."
9. ' The above order shows that Food Department's earlier order dated 17-5-1987 was withdrawn and the appellant was assigned seniority as Assistant Food Controller from 9-6-1981 on which he was promoted to that post. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Sindh Civil Servants (Probation, Confirmation and Seniority) Rules 1975, seniority of a civil servant shall be reckoned from the date of his regular appointment". On our query from the appellant's counsel as well as from the appellant in open Court, if the appellant was promoted to the post of Assistant Food Controller for the first time on 9-6-1981 and whether the said promotion was made on regular basis, their reply was in the affirmative.'
10. ' Accordingly in view of such admission, the appellant's seniority in the cadre of Assistant Food Controller was correctly fixed. However, the argument raised on behalf of the appellant was that he was made to suffer in seniority when he was Food Inspector and it was in consequence of the wrong determination of his Seniority at that stage that his seniority in higher grade of Assistant Food Controller came to be fixed to his detriment w,e,f, 9-6-1981. According to the appellant's counsel the appellant was given seniority in the cadre of Food Inspector not from the date of his appointment to that cadre but from the date he joined that post. Elaborating his argument further, he submitted that as he was relieved from the charge of lower post late by six days, his joining of the higher post was delayed and in the meantime several persons inducted in the Food Inspectors cadre became senior to him.
11. ' It would appear from the above argument that unless the appellant's grievance with regard to his seniority as Food Inspector was redressed his seniority in Assistant Food Controllers' cadre would remain unaltered. It would count from the date of his promotion to that cadre, as had been decided by the Chief Secretary vide Food Departments's Notification dated 21-6-1989 reproduced above. Obviously the appellant's objection with regard to his seniority as Food Inspector did not find favour with the Chief Secretary. This being the position the question would arise if at this belated stage we could rectify the appellant's seniority as Food Inspector so as to count it from 19- 10-1958, the date of his appointment in the capacity and not from 25-10-1958 when he actually joined that post.
12. ' In this connection our reference was invited to this Tribunal's judgment, dated 20th July, 1977 in Appeal No, 114 1974. Although the said appeal was admittedly filed by the appellant when he was Food Inspector, yet he suppressed this fact in the present appeal for obvious reasons. In his previous appeal the appellant raised the question of his seniority in the cadre of Food Inspectors claiming that he was senior to all the 24 private respondents including Ghulam Muhammad Yousafani specified in the memo of the said appeal. We have carefully perused the judgment of our predecessor Tribunal in the said appeal. It would appear that in the said appeal appellant had put forth his grievance against the decision taken by the Director Food, on 1-2-1974, on the review application submitted by same Mr. Ghulam Muhammad Yousufani whose name figures in para. 4 of the memo of the present appeal, which also repeats the same fact that on his representation the Director Food passed Order No,SOF(1)-4(14)/70, dated 1-2-1974 revising his earlier order obviously of 11-12-1973 whereby the appellant was placed senior over all the 24 respondents. In the present appeal the appellant also withheld the information that he challenged the order of the Director, dated 1-2-1974 in his representation made to the Food Minister, but the same was rejected. He also suppressed the fact that after rejection of his representation by the Minister, Food, he took the matter to the Chief Minister by filing petition on 16-4-1974 but as he got no reply, he approached this Tribunal in the aforementioned appeal (Appeal No,114/74).
13. ' It would be noticed that our predecessor Tribunal after due consideration of the arguments, made by the parties before them, dismissed the said appeal. In other words the Service Tribunal refused to interfere with the decision of the Director, Food dated 1-2-1974 whereby the appellant's seniority was reduced and brought down below all the 24 respondents specified in his appeal. Thus, after due adjudication of the appellant's seniority in the cadre of Food Inspectors by the competent judicial forum namely Sindh Service Tribunal, the chapter of his seniority in the said cadre was finally closed, particularly when he did not challenge the Tribunal's decision before the Supreme Court. Despite that, as contained in para 5 of the memo of the present appeal, the Secretary Food Department on representation of the appellant (date not mentioned), vacated the order dated 1- 2-1974, by his order made on 17-5-1987. It was gathered from the written statement filed on behalf of the official respondents that the Secretary, Food Department passed the belated order of 17-5- 1987 on fresh petition which appellant had made on 30-12-1985, after the judgment of this Tribunal in his earlier Appeal No,114/1974, whereby the question of his seniority as Food Inspector had been finally clinched. Since, the appellant did not challenge the decision of the Service Tribunal before the Supreme Court, it became final and binding on him. Accordingly he was not permitted to move a fresh petition, thereby reopening his case for reconsideration by the authorities. We are of the view that the learned Secretary had no power to pass a fresh order in the case which had been finally decided by the Service Tribunal by its judgment dated 20-7-1977. His order dated 17-5-1987 was without jurisdiction. Consequently all actions taken in the light of that order were null and void.
14. It seems to us that the Chief secretary's decision as reflected in the Food Department's Notification dated 21-6-1989 has simply reintegrated the above legal position though not in so many words.
15. ' For above reasons we are satisfied that seniority of the appellant in cadre of Food Inspectors was finally clinched by the judgment of this Tribunal dated 20-7-1977 passed in his earlier Appeal No, 114/74. Therefore, the appellant's fresh petition after more than eight years, reopening the same issue was uncalled for. Similarly the Secretary's order passed on such petition was without jurisdiction and hence ab initio void. Therefore, we hold that the order passed by the Chief Secretary, fixing the appellant's seniority as Assistant Food Controller from the date of his promotion to that post was correct.
16. ' Accordingly the appeal being without any merit is dismissed with no order as to costs.