1971 PLP [C (PLC(CS))

Since the appellant has come to us because his seniority has not been determined in the Directorate of Health Services at Lahore and a wrong date for fixation of his seniority has been communicated to the Director of Health Services, Multan, his seniority is to be determined in accordance with rule 9 of the West Pakistan Health Department Ministerial Establishment (Regional) Recruitment Rules, 1964, which provides as follows. "

9. Seniority.‑(1) The seniority inter se of the members of the Establishment in the‑ various grades thereof shall be determined‑ (a) in tire case of members appointed by initial recruitment in accordance with the order of merit assigned by the Selection Board appointing authority ; provided that person selected for the Establishment in an earlier selection shall rank senior to the persons selected in a later selection ; and (b) in the case of members appointed otherwise, with reference to the date of their continuous appointment therein; provided that if the date of continuous appointment in the case of two or more members of the Establishment is the same the older official if not junior to the younger official or officials in the next below grade, shall rank senior to the younger official or officials. Explanation L‑If a junior official in a lower grade is promoted to a higher grade temporarily in the public interest, even though continuing later permanently, in the higher grade, it would not adversely affect the interest of his seniors in the fixation of his seniority in the higher grade. Explanation IL‑If a junior official in a lower grade is promoted to a higher grade by superseding a senior official and subsequently that official is also promoted, the official promoted first shall rank senior to the official promoted subsequently. Explanation III.‑A junior official appointed to a , higher grade shall be deemed to have superseded a senior official only if both the junior and the senior officials were considered for the higher grade and the junior official was appointed in preference to the. senior official. (2) The Seniority in the various grade of the Establishment of the members appointed by initial recruitment vis‑a‑vis these appointed otherwise shall be determiaed‑ (a) in case both the official appointed by initial recruitment and the official appointed otherwise have been. appointed against substantive vacancies, or both have been appointed against temporary vacancies, with reference to the date of appointment to such vacancies in the case of the official appointed by initial recruitment and to the date of continuous appointment against such vacancy in the case of the official appointed otherwise ; provided that if the two dates are the same the official appointed otherwise shall rank senior to the official appointed by initial recruitment ; (b) in case the official appointed by initial recruitment has been appointed against a substantive vacancy and the official appointed otherwise has been appointed against a temporary vacancy, the official appointed by initial recruitment shall rank senior to the offcial appointed otherwise; and (c) in case the official appointed otherwise is appointed against a substantive vacancy and the official appointed by initial recruitment is appointed against a temporary vacancy, the official appointed otherwise shall rank senior to the official appointed by initial recruitment." Under sub‑rule (1) of rule 9, the appellant is entitled to count his seniority vis‑a‑vis direct recruits from 10‑8‑1953, which is the date of his appointment as Stenographer, and against promotees under sub‑rule (2) of rule

9. The dates of appointment of the respondents have been mentioned above. We are not determining the seniority of the appellant vis‑a‑vis the respondents who are promotees and are leaving their seniority to be determined by the Department under sub‑rule (2) of rule

9. It may, however, be mentioned that Mr. Faiz Muhammad having been allocated to Bahawalpur Region arid seniority having been determined on regional basis, his seniority vis‑a‑vis the appellant is not to be determined. Our attention has also been drawn to amendment of the 1964 Rules by Notification No. S. O. XVIII.1.47/63, darted the 9th December 1965, in which the following Note occurs "Note.‑A common seniority list shall be maintained of Assistants and Stenographers in the Establishment and Head Clerks/Senior Accountants in the Subordinate Offices for the purposes of promotion to the posts of Superintendents provided that notwithstanding anything contained to the proviso to clause (b) of sub‑rule (1) of rule 9, where the date of continuous appointment of an Assistant, a Head Clerk, a Senior Accountant and a Stenographer or any two or'‑more of them is the same. (a) An Assistant shall be deemed to be senior, to a Head Clerk, a Senior Accountant and a Stenographer, (b) a Head Clerk shall be deemed to be senior to a Senior Accountant and a Stenographer; and (c) a Senior Accountant shall be deemed to be senior to a Stenographer." It has been pointed out in this connection that the word "Establishment" is defined in clause (g) of ‑rule 2 of the 1964 Rules. Thus it is contended that Stenographers in the Subordinate offices are not covered by these rules for promotion as Superintendent. We are not deciding this question as .we are directing the determination of seniority first by the department in accordance with the rules. For the reasons stated above, we order as above, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.