' SH. RIAZ AHMAD, J.---The above four appeals by leave of this Court arise out of the judgment dated 21-12-1992 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore. The first two appeals have been filed by the civil servants in the service of the Government of Punjab whereas the last two appeals have been filed by the Government of Punjab against the common judgment of the Tribunal.
Through the impugned judgment the appeals before the Tribunal were allowed in favour of the respondents in the first two appeals and, therefore, the affected civil servants as well as the Government of Punjab sought leave to appeal and by common order leave was granted to the appellants.
2. The facts in brief giving rise to the institution of these appeals are that in the first two appeals the appellants and the respondents were employees of three departments, namely I.R.D.P., Peoples Works Programme and Local Government. Vide notification dated 9-10-1978 these three departments were merged into one department known as Local Government and Rural Development. Pursuant to the above merger all posts in all the three departments were abolished as from 10-3-1979 with the following condition:- "that the existing personnel will be adjusted against the posts carrying the same pay and scales e.g. Those already in N.P.S.-17 will be adjusted against N.P.S.-17 posts created in the re-organised set up."
3. It appears that before the abolition majority of the officers in N.P.S.-16 working in People Works Programme were promoted to N.P.S.-17 as Project Managers on probation till they were regularised.
The case of the respondents in the first two appeals is that they are the members of the unified service:cadre in N.P.S.-17 carrying designation of Project Manager and Assistant Director and both these posts were at par and were also considered interchangeable. This fact has also been admitted in the comments filed by the Government of Punjab in the writ petition filed by the respondents and it also reflected and affirmed by the consolidated seniority list of Project Managers/Assistant Directors notified in the years 1979, 1984 and 1988. The grievance of the respondents was that under the 1981 Service Rules, an attempt was made to deny the promotion to the Project Managers to the post of Director in Grade-18 by providing that incumbents of the post of Assistant Director having five years experience would be eligible. Subsequent thereto, through three notifications dated 5-4-1990, 10-4-1990 and 27-6-1990 these three departments were disintegrated and two groups, Group I and Group II were created. Through notification dated 27-6- 1990, it was alleged, the officers in Group II Were relegated to secondary position inasmuch they were rendered ineligible to hold that post of Assistant Director till all officers in Group I were absorbed against the said post. It was, therefore, vehemently contended that the rules, notifications and all other acts were violative of Articles 8 and 25 of the Constitution. The appeals were resisted by the appellants as well as the Government of Punjab and it was contends on their behalf before the Tribunal that the respondents had no vested right to be promoted and the Government was competent to reorganise the department and to provide rules for promotion. The Tribunal after hearing both sides allowed the appeals of the respondents in the following terms:- "As a result we accept the appeal, set aside the impugned notifications/orders dated 5-4-1990, 10- 4-1990 and 27-6-1990 and direct that the eligibility of the appellants as well as the respondents for promotion to N.P.S.-18 will be based on the consolidated seniority list dated 1-1-1998 existing before issuance of the aforesaid three notifications/orders. The employees of the defunct I.R.D.P., P.W.P.
And Local Government having been integrated into a unified Service, the condition of five years service as Assistant Director laid down for promotion to the post of Director (N.P.S.-18) against item No,4 in the schedule attached to the Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Service Rules, 1981 so as to exclude others is not only repugnant to the purposes and objectives of the scheme of merger but also discriminatory, unfair, anomalous and self-defeating. It is clearly hit by Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan. The Tribunal has the necessary jurisdiction to strike it down as held in 1991 SCM R 1041 (1063) and in exercise thereof, we proceed to declare it full and void in so far as it adversely affects the appellants and the respondents Nos.74 to 267."
4. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties we have carefully heard the contentions raised by them and have also considered various implications of the judgment impugned. In our view, the judgment of the Tribunal has caused injustice to the incumbents of the post of Assistant Director, who were already holding regular appointment on permanent basis. If the order of the Tribunal is allowed to remain in the field, their seniority would be affected qua their juniors or those who have become regular appointees on account of the merger and also as a result of the creation of new posts in terms of the order dated 28-2-1979. Obviously, the rights of such employees cannot be infringed to their prejudice. The terms of the merger as well as the subsequent disintegration by virtue of which two groups were created also ran contrary to the orders of the Tribunal because the incumbents of the post of Assistant Director holding regular appointment at the time of merger had vested right to rank senior to those who were subsequent regular appointees as a result of merger or creation of new posts. We are, therefore, of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the order of the Tribunal is set aside.
5. The above are the reasons for our short order dated 22-6-1998 which reads as under:- "For the reasons to be recorded later on all the above appeals are dismissed with the clarification that on the day of the merger the incumbents of the office of Assistant Director who were already holding regular appointment on permanent basis would be treated as senior to those who have become regular appointees on account of merger and creation of the new posts in terms of order dated 28-2-1979. There will be no order as to costs."