1984 PLP 1354 (SCMR)

(i) Section Officers who already stood encadred in the former C.S.S. Cadre through notifications issued from time to time. (ii) Section Officers who were eligible to be encadred but notifications could not be issued before the abolition of the C.S.S. Cadre. (iii) Section Officers directly recruited by F.P.S.C. till the end of 1974. (iv) Ad hoc Section Officers who qualified in the Promotional Examina tions of 1967 and 1969 but who could not be adjusted on regular basis due to non‑availability of posts in the departmental quota. (v) Ad hoc Section Officers who appeared in the Promotional Examinations of 1967 and 1969 and were cleared by revising the standard in consultation with the F.P.S.C. Seniority has been dealt with in rule 12 which, as amended by O.M. No.l/2/75‑ARC., dated 13‑11‑1976 and No.10/1/74‑C III(A), dated 17‑2‑1579, reads: ' "12‑ Seniority. ‑ (a) **************************************************** (b) Section Officers in Grade 17 & 18: (i) There shall be one combined seniority list of Section Officers in Grades 17 and 18 irrespective of the Ministry or Division or Office where they may for the time being be serving. The seniority of the promoted Section Officers appointed on regular basis in various phases upto and including Promotional Examination held in 1969, and of the Section Officers appointed by direct recruitment upto and including XIVth batch, has already been determined and notified vide Establishment Division's O.M. No. 8/1/74‑C III(A) , dated the 26th December, 1375. (ii) The seniority of Section Officers other than those mentioned in (i) above shall be determined on the basis of date of regular continuous officiation as Section Officers provided that the Promotee Officers of a particular year shall, a‑0 a class, be senior to the direct recruits of that year. Their inter se seniority, however, shall be determined in the case of direct recruits according to the order of merit assigned to them on completion of their training at the Academy for Administrative Training and, in the case of promoted officers, according to their order of merit as determined in the Promotion Examination. (iii) Section Officers to be appointed in future on regular basis whether by promotion or by direct recruitment.‑‑ The promotee officers of particular year shall, as a class, be senior to the direct recruits of that year. Their inter se seniority, however, shall be determined in the case of direct recruits according to the order of merit assigned to them on completion of their training at the Academy for Administrative Training and, in the case of promoted officers, according to their order of merit as determined in the Promotional Examination."

5. It is contended that after the initial composition of the Group, the petitioner was appointed on a regular basis under rule 4(iv) and as such his seniority was governed by rule 12(b)(i) as he was to be treated to be a promoted Section Officer appointed on a regular basis. The contention, we are afraid, is not tenable. Rule 4 speaks of as many a. five categories. The case of Muhammad Riaz respondent fell in the category "(i)", that is, Section Officers who already stood encadred in the former C.S.S. Cadre by virtue of notification of 20‑8‑1973, whereas, the petitioner came under category "(iv)", that is, ad hoc Section Officers who had qualified in the Promotional Examination of 1967 but could not be adjusted on regular basis due to non‑availability of posts in the departmental qouta. For the purpose of seniority, the petitioner does not court under rule 12(b)(i) because that sub‑clause relates to seniority of only two categories, i.e., (i) promoted Section Officers appointed on regular basis in various phases upto and including Promotional Examination held in 1969 and (ii) Section Officers appointed by direct recruitment upto and including XIVth batch. The petitioner had not been appointed on regular basis before the operation of rule 4(iv) and as such his case is governed not by sub‑clause (i) but by sub‑clause (11) of rule 12(b) which dews with seniority of Section Officers "other than those mentioned in (i) above". The petitioner can claim his seniority only in terms of sub‑clause (ii) of rule 12(b).

6. No case is, therefore, made out for interference with the order of the Tribunal. This petition is dismissed. S. Q. Petition dismissed.