RAJA BASHIR AHMAD KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---This appeal is directed against Notification No. Local Govt. /LGC-55/SO-1/93, dated 16-12-1993 whereby the appellant was reverted from the post of Extension Officer B-16 to the rank of Project Assistant and Notification No.SLG-58/S.I/93, dated 23-2- 1995 whereby his appeal against the said Notification was rejected by the Government.
2. The brief facts are that the appellant was holding the post of Project Assistant in the Local Government Department and was promoted on 31-8-1992 as Extension Officer. Prior to this order to appeals were pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court whereby the seniority of the parties was under disposal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to reject the appeal of Ghulam Nabi Mir. The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court was passed in Appeal No. 14 of 1992 decided on 6-10-1992. The Service Tribunal vide its judgment dated 20-11-1991 dismissed the appeal of Mir Ghulam Nabi as being incompetent. The Supreme Court was pleased to hold "so far as the merits of the case are concerned i.e., the question as to whether in the circumstances of the case, the respondent No. 3 was in fact rightly declared senior to the appellant or not, we need not decide the same because the appeal filed by the appellant before the Service Tribunal was incompetent". There was another appeal in the Supreme Court which was Appeal No. 15 of 1992, decided on 7-10-1992 between Ghulam Muhammad Samsam as appellant and Secretary, Local Government and others as respondents. Syed Zaffar-ul-Hassan Shah was respondent No. 3 in that appeal. The order of promotion-dated 31-8-1992 was reversed through Notification dated 16-12-1993. The appellant filed an appeal against this order before the Government which was rejected vide order dated 23-2- 1995.
3. The respondents have filed written objections denying the contents of appeal. It may also be noted that Mir -Ghulam Nabi died during the pendency of this appeal.
4. We have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
5. The contention of counsel for appellant is that the order of promotion was reversed and appellant was reverted to the post of Project Assistant presumably in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 7-11-1992 which judgment never contemplated any reversion of the appellant. The order was passed on wrongful assumptions and against spirit of the judgment of the Supreme Court and is, therefore, invalid. We have given our careful consideration to the submission made by the counsel and have also gone through the record and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The concluding part of judgment is reproduced:-- "Consequently, we accept the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Service Tribunal. As a result the appeal filed by Ghulam Muhammad Samsam with the Service Tribunal is accepted and it is-- directed that the Director, Local Government and Rural Development shall modify the seniority list and the name of Zaffar--ul-Hassan Shah should be deleted from Serial No. 3 of the list and should be entered at a proper place in light of the fact that he was promoted as Supervisor on 7th September, 1985. He is also directed to make other consequential changes as may be necessary in light of this judgment."
The dispute before the Service Tribunal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court was in respect of seniority of appellant Syed Zaffar-ul-Hassan Shah and Ghulam Muhammad Samsam. From the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court it appears that the Supreme Court was pleased to accept the appeal of Ghulam Muhammad Samsam and direct that the name of Syed Zaffar-ul-Hassan Shah should be deleted from Serial No. 3 and be entered at a proper place m light of the fact that he was promoted as Supervisor on 7-9-1985. It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that Ghulam Muhammad Samsam was a Supervisor since 1979. The Department instead of modifying the seniority list as directed by the Supreme Court proceeded to revert the appellant from the post of Extension Officer B-16 to that of Project Assistant and respondent Mir Ghulam Nabi was appointed Extension Officer, Bagh to place of appellant. In the aforementioned Appeal No. 14 of 1992 titled as Mir Ghulam Nabi v. Secretary, Local Government etc the question of seniority was left undecided because the appeal was not decided on merit as being incompetent. We agree with the contention of the counsel for appellant that there was no justification to order the reversion of the appellant to the post of Project Assistant on the basis of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned above which has nothing to do with the reversion of Zaffar-ul-Hassan Shah. The Department, instead of following the direction of the supreme Court for modifying the seniority list passed the impugned order-- The judgment of the Supreme Court was wrongfully made basis for the order under appeal and, therefore, this order is not sustainable.
6. In view of the above we accept this appeal set aside the Notification dated 16-12-1993. The Department is at liberty to pass any order which tray be based on modified or to be modified seniority list as was directed by the Supreme Court. No order as to costs.