' ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.-- Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal dated 6-11-1993 whereby the learned Tribunal accepting the appeal filed by Abdul.
Rashid respondent No,1 held that he was senior to Muhammad Akram and Abdul Rahim respondents Nos.3 and 4 herein and was entitled to be promoted to BPS 14/16, from the date the senior most of them was promoted".
2. Facts relevant for the disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are that Abdur Rashid respondent was initially appointed as a Vaccinator on 24-8-1960 and later as Sanitary Inspector w,e,f, 19-12- 1960 in the Province of Balochistan. On the dissolution of the Province of West Pakistan, he was repatriated to the Province of Punjab on 8-1-1973 and he joined as Sanitary Inspector at Sheikhupura. It appears that his position in the seniority was fixed with reference to the date of his repatriation to the Province of Punjab and not from the date of his continuous officiating i,e, 19-12- 1960 with the result that Muhammad Akram and Abdul Rahim respondents who according to Abdur Rashid respondent were junior to him were promoted as District Sanitary Inspectors (BPS-14 later upgraded to BPS-16) but he was ignored for the reason that his seniority was counted from the date that he was repatriated to Punjab. He, therefore, preferred" representation against the promotions granted to his juniors contending that according to the policy letter No,SOR- II(S&GAD)3- 39/73, dated 23rd November, 1974, he should have been given seniority from the date of his continuous officiating in the particular grade and not from the date of his joining at Sheikhupura. Getting no response to his representation, Abdur Rashid filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal which as stated above was accepted vide the impugned judgment. The learned Tribunal relying upon the policy letter aforementioned held that it "clearly protected seniority on repatriation so that it had to be counted in the appellant's case from 19-12-1960 and not 8-1-973 when he took over at Sheikhupura. Consequently the appellant w-as senior to respondents Mr. Muhammad Akram joining service on 15-4-1963 and Mr. Abdur Rahim on 15-5-1965". Abdul Rashid respondent was accordingly held entitled to be promoted to BPS-14/16 from the date the senior idiom of The said two respondents was promoted.
3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing in support of this petition. His main grievance is that the petitioner was not impleaded as a party in the appeal before the Service Tribunal and the impugned order has been passed by the Tribunal to his prejudice without affording him any opportunity of putting across his point of view. Learned counsel has admitted that the petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Inspector on 5-10-1967. It is also not denied that Abdur Rashid respondent was appointed as Sanitary Inspector in the Province of Baluchistan on 19-12-1960 and it has been found by the Tribunal that he was repatriated to the Province of Punjab in 1973. The question of seniority of the Punjab domiciled officials repatriated from Baluchistan was decided- by the Government vide policy letter, dated 23rd November, 1974 which laid down that the seniority of the officials who were initially recruited in Baluchistan and were repatriated to the Province of Punjab "should be fixed with reference to the date of continuous officiating in a particular grade".
Relying on this formula, Abdur Rashid respondent would undoubtedly rank senior to the petitioner who on his own showing was even junior to respondents Nos.3 and 4. That being so, the petitioner cannot make any legitimate grievance of his non-implement as a party in the appeal before the Service Tribunal. Needless to observe that on the facts admitted and found by the Service Tribunal, the judgment of the Tribunal would not have been different even in the presence of the petitioner in view of the policy decision of the Government contained in the letter dated 23rd November, 1974.
Confronted with this position, learned counsel has sought to contend that the respondent Abdur Rashid had been transferred to Punjab at his own request and, therefore, his case was covered by Para. (3) of the Policy A Letter which treated the officials who were transferred to Punjab from Baluchistan and other Provinces at their own request" as fresh recruits for purposes of seniority. We find no merit in this contention as the learned Tribunal has proceeded on admitted position that the respondent was repatriated from Baluchistan_ on the dissolution of One Unit and the petitioner has not placed on record any material to show that the respondent was transferred to Punjab at his own request. Petitioner has not even made any averment in this behalf in this petition.
4. For what has been said above, we find no merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave sought refused.