1984 PLP 757 (SCMR)

NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑.This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18‑11‑1982 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore. The relevant facts are that the respondent, Mansoor Ahmad Malik, was originally appointed as an Assistant Settlement Commissioner on 19‑t‑1960 on ad hoc basis. His services as Assistant Settlement Commissioner were terminated on 31‑5‑1962 and he was appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer. However, on 23‑9‑1967, he was appointed on ad hoc basis to the post of Deputy Settlement Commissioner. This post was, however, purely temporary and terminable at any tune without assigning any reason by giving notice in writing for a period not less than 14 days. The appointment furthermore was subject to the approval of the Central Public Service Commission. The Central Public Service Commission, by its notification dated 21‑9‑1966, agreed to the ad hoc appointment of the respondent as Deputy Settlement Commissioner, who was allowed to continue as such upto 21‑5‑1969 or till the finalization of the Recruitment Rules which ever was earlier. No service rules having been framed by the Federal Government, the respondent's services were continued on ad hoc basis until the provincialization of the Department which took place with effect from 1‑1‑1973, where after, the respondent continued in service on ad hoc basis under the Board of Revenue (S & R Wing) Punjab. The relevant service rules were framed and notified on 2‑I1‑1977 and, accordingly, the cases of ad hoc appointees and promotees to the post of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner (Grade 17) and the Assistant Accounts Officer (Grade 16) were placed before a Department/ Promotion Committee consti tuted by the Provincial Government for the purpose. The said Committee however, did not find the respondent suitable for regularization of his appointment as Deputy Settlement Commissioner (in Grade 17). Consequ ently, his appointment as Deputy Settlement Commissioner on ad hoc basis was terminated and he was allowed to continue in post of Assistant Ac counts Officer (Grade' 16) by a notification dated 6‑2‑1978. The respondent made a Departmental representation against the termi nation of his ad hoc appointment as Deputy Settlement Commissioner and his reversion to the lower post of the Assistant Accounts Officer, but the same were rejected. He then filed a writ petition (W. P. No. 2083/S of 1978) in the Lahore High Court, on 25‑4‑1978 against the aforesaid noti fication dated 6‑2‑1978 but this too was dismissed by the High Court as having been withdrawn on 10‑1‑1.979. Sometime later, he again filed another Writ Petition No. 6601. of 1979 in the Lahore High Court which was also dismissed in limine by the order of a learned Single Judge of the said Court on 13‑9‑1981 on the ground that it was not maintainable as an alternate remedy by way of appeal before the Service Tribunal. Accordingly, on 18‑10‑1981, the respondent filed a time‑barred appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal against the order dated 6‑2‑1978, which, however, was accepted by the Tribunal vide its judgment dated 18‑11‑1982 impugned before us. Hence this petition for leave to appeal. Mr. Shahzad Jahangir, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the Settlement Department, contended that the appeal filed by the respondent A on 18‑10‑1,981 against the order of his reversion dated 6‑2‑1978 was time‑bar red by more than three and a half years and although an objection was taken in the written reply submitted before the Tribunal by the Settlement Department, the Service Tribunal had proceeded to decide the appeal on merits without adverting to the question of limitation which could not have legally been done vide Ahsan Ali and others v. District. Judge and others (P L D 1969 S C 167) He further contended that the finding of the Service Tribunal that even if the respondent was ad hoc appointee he was deemed to have been regularly appointed by virtue of the Government of the Punjab, Services, General Administration and Information Department's notification, dated 7‑8‑1973 where under :‑ "every person appointed on ad hoc basis to any Gazetted Service or post and who has continuously served in such service or post, as the case may be, since or before 1st October, 1969, and whose appointment to such service or post has not been regularized shall, with effect from the date of this notification be deemed to have been regularly appointed to such service or post." was not tenable. It is submitted, in this connection, that the services of the respondent having been transferred to the Punjab Government with effect from 1‑1‑1972 he could not be considered to have been in such ser vice or post before 1‑10‑1969. Similarly, he 'also could not be considered so "since" 1st October, 1969 because the word "since" means "as from" 1st October, 1969. These submissions, inter alia, require consideration. Leave is, accordingly, granted. As regards the matter of stay we find that the respondent has already superannuated and, therefore, the order of the Service Tribunal directing, that he should be re‑posted as Deputy Settlement Commissioner does not arise. Be that as it may, the respondent may be paid all the dues to which he is eligible under the law such as gratuity, pension etc. on the assumption that he was validly retired as Assistant Accounts Officer without prejudice to his claim that he is entitled to these benefits as a person who superannuated as a Deputy Settlement Commissioner. S. Q. Leave granted.