2000 PLP 656 (SCMR)

SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J.

Executive Engineer, Provincial Building Circle, Lahore has filed the above petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of learned Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 29-7-1999 whereby the service appeal filed by respondent No. l was allowed with the direction that he may be allowed to join the parent department within a period of seven days from the date of communication of the order of the learned Tribunal.

2. Respondent No.1, who was a Sub-Engineer (B-11) in the Communication and Works Department, Government of Punjab, was posted on deputation with the Punjab Local Government Department as Assistant Engineer (B-17). Although he was a Diploma Holder in Radio Mechanical Technology but he was given the assignment of a Civil Engineer against a higher post where he worked for about 11 years. He was repatriated to his parent department by order, dated 12-12-1989. However, he managed to postpone his reversion to his parent department and. continued efforts for his absorption in the Punjab Local Government Board but he failed to succeed. Finally, in pursuance of the direction of the then Chief Minister, respondent No.1 was ordered to be repatriated to his parent department on 4-12-1996. In spite of the orders of Chief Minister, it appears, that respondent No. l was not repatriated to his parent department as his department took the position that his lien in the parent department has been terminated. The respondent, therefore, approached the learned Service Tribunal with, the prayer that the order for his repatriation to his parent department be set aside and Punjab Local Government Department be directed to absorb him permanently. The learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that as the respondent was never absorbed permanently in the borrowing department, his lien in his parent department could not be terminated. Consequently, the parent department of the respondent was directed to allow him to join within seven days of the communication of the order of the Tribunal in accordance with the law.

3. The department (Provincial Building Circle, Lahore) is now seeking leave to appeal against the above order of the learned Tribunal and it is contended that the respondent having served his connection with his department for over 11 years and as such he was not entitled to rejoin his parent department. The position taken by the petitioner is untenable, as in view of the categorical finding recorded by the learned Tribunal that the respondent was never absorbed permanently in the borrowing department, he continued to be on deputation and therefore, his lien could not be terminated in his parent department. No case for interference with the judgment of the learned Service Tribunal is made out. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed and leave is refused. M.B.A./E-14/S Petition dismissed.