SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---Mr. Manzoor Ullah has made two grievances for seeking review of the judgment. In the first place the copy of the judgment does not show his presence as respondent No.4 in the title, though he was also present in person and had argued the case.
We have seen the original judgment. It does mention his presence in person. Necessary correction be made in the copy.
2. As regards the merits, his contention is with regard to the denial of seniority as against appellant Sabir Zamir Siddiqui.
The review Petition appears to be misconceived because the question of his seniority in the lower grade stands determined on account of the judgment in Inayat Ali and another v. Manzoorullah and another 1987 S. Q M R 407. In the higher grade Dr. Sabir Zamir Siddiqui happened to be a direct recruit. As against him Mr. Manzoor Ullah could not claim seniority because on account of our judgment in Civil Appeals Nos. 190 of 1988 and 191 of 1988 (Muhammad Ibrahim Azad v. The Secretary, Government of the Punjab and 4 others) belonging to the same department, we have held that promotions were all made in violation of the rules on the subject and they have to be revised in consultation with the appropriate selecting authority/Departmental Promotion Committee with a view to conform to the rules as were in existence when the vacancies were available or when the promotion was sought to be made. Till the regularisation of such promotion takes place, the petitioner cannot claim seniority over a direct recruit m a higher grade.
3. On merits no case is made out for review, which is hereby dismissed.