1984 SCMR 271 (PLP)

MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.‑Through this petition leave is sought to appeal against the judgment and order of the Punjab Service Tribunal‑dated 1‑11‑1982 passed in Appeal No. 474/1455 of 1981. The petitioner joined service in the Forest Department as a forester in the year 1963‑

64. In 1979 the plantations on Canal sides were transferred from the Forests Department to the Irrigation Department. On account of this, retrenchment of posts of the field staff in the Forest Department was inevitable. In view of this the case of staff of the Forest Department was considered by the Government and it was decided to transfer the functions of Linear Plantations to their Parent Department, the staff presently employed should be given assurance against any apprehended retrenchment. In pursuance of the above decision the petitioner, alongwith a number of other field staff was transferred from the Forests Department to the Parks and Wildlife Department and was absorbed as Game Inspector in the Wildlife Wing of the Department vide letter of the Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab, Lahore to the Conservator of Forests, Lahore Circle. On 12‑9‑1981 the petitioner was repatriated to the Forest Department vide letter No. SOE 1 I/2‑16/79.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that order dated 28‑8‑1979 of appellant's absorption in the Games Department having been accepted and acted upon it became final and it was not open to the respon dent to review the terms of absorption and send him to his parent Depart ment that the respondent had even otherwise not appointed any Game Inspectors of its own and thus the so‑called condition of repatriation to the Forests Department on the availability of the duly qualified staff in the Wildlife Department has not been fulfilled.

4. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel and find that in letter No. 17718/DCF/P & D/Estt. dated 20‑8‑1979 it was stipulated that the Game Inspectors and the Assistant Game Wardens were to be absorbed purely on temporary basis and as soon as the ban on recruitment was lifted and suitable candidates meeting the prescribed qualifications and A experience were available, the persons absorbed against those posts would be repatriated to their parent Department. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner was absorbed permanently as a Game Inspector and could not be repatriated to the Forest Department as a Forester is without any substance. We find this petition to be without merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. S.Q Leave refused.