ORDER Saad Saood Jan (Chairman).--The appellant was initially appointed as Sub-Inspector (Opium). Some time in 1966 he was declared surplus and his services were terminated with effect from 8-3-1966. He was allowed one day's leave and thus was made to relinquish charge on 7-3- 1966. On 5-5-1966 he was appointed as Sub-Inspector (Excise). It was an entirely new appointment as the letter of appointment issued to him indicates. Thus, his seniority amongst the Sub- Inspectors (Excise) has t J be counted from the date when he was offered this new appointment.
This is exactly what the administrative department has done.
2. In support of this appeal, the appellant has relied upon the West Pakistan Excise and Taxation Department Subordinate Service Rules which came into force in November, 1966. Under these rules the posts of Sub- Inspector (Opium) and Sub-Inspectors (Excise) amongst others, were included in one service, namely, the West Pakistan Excise and Taxation Department Subordinate Service. It is contended that on account of the merger^ brought about by the said Rules the appellant is entitled to count his seniority from the date when he joined as Sub-Inspector (Opium). We do not think so. At the time when the services of the appellant were terminated, the Sub-Inspectors (Excise) and Sub- Inspectors (Opium) belonged to entirely two different services. The merger took place long after the appellant had been declared surplus as Sub-Inspector (Opium) and his services had been terminated. Consequently, he cannot claim that he should be assigned a higher position ini the seniority list over those Sub-Inspectors who were already working on theU Excise side when the appellant was appointed thereto as a fresh recruit. Wei find nothing in the rules which may suggest that the merger was to take effect retrospectively.
3. For the reasons stated above this appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed in limine.