1. ' ABDUL RAZZAQ A. THAHIM (CHAIRMAN).---Appellant is working as U.D.C. In the office of the Inspector-General of Police, Islamabad. A seniority list of U.D.Cs. Was issued in 1993 wherein, private respondents 2 to 6 were shown senior to the appellant. Being aggrieved, he filed departmental appeal on 12-9-1994 but the same was dismissed by the I.-G. Vide order, dated 26-7-1995 as being badly time-barred. Under the rules, the appellant was supposed to file departmental appeal against the seniority list, within thirty days, which was issued in October, 1993, and departmental appeal having been made on 12-9-1994 after about one year was hopelessly time-barred and rightly dismissed by the Competent Authority, without going into the merits. The contention of the appellant is that seniority order is void and, therefore, limitation does not apply. We are sorry, we do not subscribe to this view, as the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Arshad Saeed, D.I.-G. v. Secretary, Establishment Division and others reported in 1994 SCM R 1033, has held that plea of void order cannot circumvent the bar of limitation and the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 being a special law, appeals have to be filed within the time limit provided in the Act. Furthermore, it has also been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, PIAC v. Nasim Malik, reported in PLD 1990 SC 951, that if the departmental appeal is time-barred, the appeal before the Tribunal would also be time-barred and incompetent. On both counts, the appeal is dismissed in limine, as time-barred.