1995 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

RAJA BASHIR AHMAD KHAN (CHAIRMAN).‑‑‑This judgment will dispose of two appeals filed by Abdul Jabbar Meer against Notification No. 4465‑74/92, dated 15‑8‑1992 and Notification No. SC MISCE‑93/1380‑90, dated 20‑4‑1993 respectively.

2. The facts briefly stated are that the appellant was promoted as Assistant Superintendent in the Health Department on 9‑3‑1978. The Government, vide Notification No.(SEEN SOOAD)/2412‑25/92, dated 21‑5‑1992 distributed/transferred 55 vacant posts of Medical Assistants B‑16 in different categories of Health Department and redesignated the same. Five out of fifty five posts were redesignated as Assistant Entomologist and were allocated to various Institutions. Respondent No. 2 was appointed by initial recruitment against one of the posts vide Notification impugned in Appeal No.

657. The appellant filed a review petition before the Government against the said Notification and has filed this appeal after exhausting waiting period of 90 days as his appeal remained unresponded. Respondent No. 2 was confirmed against this post vide Notification No. (SEEN SOAAD)‑SC‑MISCE‑93/1380‑90, dated 20‑4‑1993. Appellant again filed a review petition against this Notification on 5‑10‑1993 and has filed Appeal No. 724 on 25‑1‑1994 before this Tribunal.

3. The written objections have been filed on behalf of the respondents who have contradicted the claim of the appellant in both the appeals.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

5. The important development which has taken' place during the pendency of the appeals is that the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Regularisation of Adhoc Appointment) Act, 1992 having been challenged before the High Court has been struck down and all appointments made under the said Act were declared as ad hoc appointments in nature and character. An appeal before the Supreme Court by the affectees of the judgment of the High Court met a similar fate in the Supreme Court. The result is that the Notification dated 20‑4‑1993 stands vacated by the judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court. The present appeal against this Notification has, thus been rendered infructuous.

6. As for the other appeal is concerned the impugned Notification was issued on 15‑8‑1992. The appointment made under this Act was to remain effective for a period of six months. The said Notification has met his natural death on the expiry of said period of six months. This Notification has become non‑existent and the appeal against this Notification has also become infructuous.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in Service Appeal No. 702, decided on 27‑2‑1994 by this Tribunal in case Khawaja Muhammad Tariq v. Azad Government and others accepted the appeal of the appellant and, therefore, the present appeal may also be dealt accordingly. In that appeal we declared relevant Notification as illegal and of no legal effect against the right of that appellant. In that case appellant Khawaja Muhammad Tariq was duly promoted as Deputy Director, Food on the recommendations of Selection Board. The suitability of the present appellant has yet to be considered. We are informed by the counsel for respondents and this fact is not denied by the counsel for the appellant that the Government has framed rules regulating the appointment of Assistant Entomologist whereby 25% posts are reserved for initial recruitment and the rest of the posts are kept for promotees. The facts of the case referred by the learned counsel are entirely different from the facts of the present appeals. We are, therefore, not inclined to accept the submission of the learned counsel.

8. In the circumstances we are of the opinion that both the appeals have become infructuous and liable to be dismissed on that score. We, therefore, order accordingly leaving the parties to bear their respective costs. H.B.T./270‑S/AJK Appeal dismissed being infructuous.