1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT and another Service Appeal No. 440 of 1989, decided on 20th January, 1991.

S. 4

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act, 1976, S.4

Deputy Secretaries Service Rules, 1978

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rules of Business, 1985, R.2 (1), cl. 20 and 1st Sched., Item 13

Promotion

Seniority

Appellant Deputy Secretary, Law Department, in Pay Grade-18, challenged order of promotion of respondent as Additional Secretary in Grade-19

Appellant joined Law Department as Law Officer in Grade-17 and was subsequently promoted as Deputy Secretary in Pay Scale 18

Respondent was promoted as Deputy Secretary and was posted in Secretariat (Education Branch)

Claim of appellant was that since Law Department was part and parcel of the Secretariat, and he was promoted as Deputy Secretary prior to promotion of respondent, he was as such, senior to respondent and should have been promoted as Additional Secretary before respondent was promoted as such and that order of promotion of respondent was in violation of rules 'on the subject

Held, Law Department, no doubt was an unbreakable and integral part of the Secretariat but assuming it so that inter se seniority of the parties was fixed in violation of the rules, even then an important question remained to be determined whether the seniority prepared in violation of rules had created any disqualification in the appellant for being promoted to the post of Additional Secretary

Record showed that tentative seniority list was circulated amongst Deputy Secretaries of both the Departments and after having considered objections filed on behalf of appellant, his seniority was separated from that of the Deputy Secretaries of Civil Secretariat

Seniority list issued by Government placed appellant out of Civil Secretariat and same had attained its finality also because it was- not challenged before any competent authority at proper time for being annulled under law

Had Government framed seniority of appellant separate from that of officers of Civil Secretariat holding the post of Deputy Secretaries in violation of the rules even then appellant did not have any locus standi to challenge position assigned to respondent in that list except in due course of law

Order passed by an Authority even if found to be not in conformity with provisions of rules could not be rendered ineffective or inoperative without adopting and following proper course of law prescribed for cancellation of that order

If appellant was deprived of his seniority alongwith Deputy Secretaries of Civil Secretariat then, of course, he had a genuine grievance to be remedied in accordance with law and procedure

Appellant after having failed to avail himself of legal remedy at proper time against order of Government which had denied him proper position in seniority list of Deputy Secretaries of Civil Secretariat, could not seek relief from Service Tribunal. Sardar Rafique Mahmood for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan for Respondent No.

1. Sheikh Abdul Aziz for Respondent No. 2.