1. SAAD SAOOD JAN (CHAIRMAN).-The appellant was a Steno-typist in the office of the Punjab Provincial Transport Authority, Lahore. On 10-12-73, be was promoted as Assistant in the same office on Officiating basis w. e. f. 12-1-73. Mr. Muhammad Yousaf, who was Senior Clerk in the same office represented against the promotion of the appellant. His representation, which was in the form of an appeal, was accepted by the Secretary to the Provincial Government in the Transport Department by an order dated 24-4-74 and consequently the promotion of the appellant was set aside and the Secretary, Provincial Transport Authority was directed to fill the post afresh. Against this order the appellant has come to this Tribunal.
2. The relevant provisions regulating appointments to the subordinate services of the Punjab Transport Board are contained in the Punjab Transport Department (Clerical Service) Rules, 1941.
3. Rule 6 prescribes the method of recruitment to the service. Paragraph (a) of sub-rule (1) of this Rule specifies the categories of officials eligible for promotion for the post of Assistant. Steno- typists are not included in these categories. Thus, the order of the Secretary to the Provincial Government in setting aside the promotion of the appellant was legally justified.
4. The main contention of the appellant however, is that subsection (2) of section 21 of Civil Servants Act takes away toe right of civil servants to agitate against their non-promotion. Thus, according to the appellant, the Secretary in the Transport Department was not competent to hear the appeal of Mr. Muhammad Yousaf and consequently the order made by him was without jurisdiction. We do not find any force in this contention. It is quite clear that the promotion of the appellant was made in contravention of the relevant rules. Even if the persona affected by the said promotion did not have any right to make representation against it, the Secretary in the Transport Department could suo motu interfere with it. Apart from that, it is clear that the representation of Mr. Muhammad Yousaf was made long before the Civil Servants Act came into force. We find nothing in the Act which would have the effect of destroying the representations which were pending prior to its enforcement. No other point was raised before us. This appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.