SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.---Above captioned 6 appeals are proposed to be disposed of by single judgment for the reason that facts and points of law involved therein are same with the only exception that appellants are different. In all these appeals respondent No. 3 is common and is namely Abdul Hamid Bhatti. Grievance of the appellants is that they and respondent No. 3 joined Pak. P.W.D. As Sub-Engineers in Grade-16 and it is beyond dispute that appellants are senior in rank to respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 was attached with Central Civil Division, Pak. P.W.D. As a Sub- Engineer (B-16) but subsequently on 23-10-1989 the post of Sub-Engineer '(B-16) held by respondent No. 3 was redesignated as Assistant Engineer (Civil) (Gazetted) in .The same grade which gave cause of grievance to the appellants apparently for the reason that redesignated post carried with it better status and more powers and perks in spite of the fact that grade remained same. Appellants filed representations and departmental appeals but finding no response filed appeals before the Service Tribunal which have been dismissed by judgment impugned in appeals before us.
2. It was contended before the Tribunal by the appellants that on account of redesignation of the post, appellants suffered set back by remaining non-gazetted Sub-Engineers while respondent No. 3 got an edge by becoming gazetted Assistant Engineer and in that capacity if he returns to regular service, he would claim that he is senior in rank to appellants. On the other hand it was submitted before us on behalf of respondent No. 3 that he is in Grade-16 and has not gained any promotion by redesignation of his post as Assistant Engineer. In the seniority list of Sub-Engineers available in the record, name of respondent No. 3 appears at S.No. 56 while names of appellants are indisputably above him. Service Tribunal dismissed appeals on merits and also on the ground of non-maintainability for want of final order as the order impugned was of redesignation of the post and not promotion as such.
3. During the hearing of appeals before us, on our enquiry we were informed that redesignation of the post is not promotion because grade is same and seniority of the appellants is not going to be affected. In response to our direction Mr. Muhammad Younus, Chief Administrative Officer, Pak.
P.W.D. Appeared before us and gave as assurance that redesignation of the post of respondent No. 3 as Assistant Engineer is only administrative arrangement and thereby respondent No. 3 is not promoted because he remains in Grade (B-16) and since appellants are also in the same grade as Sub-Engineers, their inter se seniority will remain same and for the purpose of future promotions seniority list mentioned above would be acted upon. In view of the statement of the Chief Administrative Officer, we direct that redesignation of the post of respondent No. 3 is not to be treated as promotion and if question arises for promotion from the grade of appellants and respondent No. 3, the same would be considered according to the seniority list mentioned above.
Appeals are disposed of in terms of the observation as above.