1984 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

The rule 7 of the aforesaid rules runs as under; "Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule, order, or instruc tions all reservation of posts for purposes of appointment, promotion or transfer in favour of persons belonging to a particular service or cadre or belonging to a particular post are abolished." Therefore rule 7 abolished the reservation of promotion to the post of Tehsildar to the Graduate Assistants of the Board of Revenue. Thus the appellant stood fully, qualified for promotion to the post of B Class Tehsildar by virtue of rule 7 of the Punjab Civil Servants (Change in Nomenclature, and Abolition of Classes) Rules, 1974. In this manner it becomes crystal clear that the Board of Revenue was under no obligation to refer the case of the appellant for relaxation to the Chief Minister as this was unnecessary and the action so taken by sending the case for relaxation was in violation of the amended rules and its mis application created a confusion which ultimately resulted in bringing the appellant's case within the purview 4 the M.L.I. No.

21. In view of above we have no hesitation to repel the argument of the learned District Attorney that the case of the appellant was hit by P. C. O. of 1981, Article

15. The case of the appellant could not be referred to Review Board because this case was for appointment on regular basis and not on ad hoc basis. The failure of the authorities to side step the application of rule 7 resulted into this exercise which ultimately brought the appellant to grief. The purview of the M.L.I. 21 as stated earlier was to deal with those appointments made during a certain period as, ad hoc without adopting the normal procedure laid down. We have in extensive referred to the amend ment of the earlier rules of 1962 under which the appellant did fall in the category of clause V but since coming into force of the Rules 1974 the appellant was fully eligible on his own merits to be promoted to the rank of Tehsilder without any necessity of relaxation of rules in his favour. M.L.I. 21 thus was not attracted to his case as he was never ad bat appointee. With regard to his suitability the record of the case reveals that he was the most suitable person from all angles. It would be useful to mention at this stag the views of various officers from time to time who found this office quite suitable for executive appointment and considered capable, indus trious and scrupulously honest. We reproduce views and the recommen dations; "Mr.S. Muhammad Akram Shah has been spoken of very highly by several D.Cs. in succession, In 1966, Mr. C A. Saied, P. C. S., then D.C. while recommending him for the post of Naib‑Tehsildar termed him as an efficient, obedient, honest and an experienced official, quite suitable for executive appointment. According to Mr. Ahmad Sadiq C S P, who was D.C. Gujrat in 1967, Mr. S. Muhammad Akram Shah is very useful official with executive trend. In September, 1968 Mr. Manzur‑ur‑Hassan, C.S.P., the then D.C. gave Mr. Muhammad Akram Shah accelerated pro‑notion due to his superb performance and also recommended him for D.C's Sanad. In 1970, Capt. Syed Naseer Ahmad, C. S. P., the then D. C. recommended . S. Muhammad Akram Shah twice for the post of Naib‑Tehsildar. The same D.C. held a very high opinion of this official. He found him a capable, industrious and scrupulously honest official who is quite intelligent and smart with pleasing behaviour. He further described him as conscientious worker who enjoyed good reputation among the officers as well as the public. I entirely agree with my predecessors. I found the official to be efficient, honest and possessing a great deal of initiative. He is a graduate. His promotion would indeed be recognition of an outstanding service record and merit. I strongly recommend him for promotion to the cadre of P C S.' (Sd.) Mahbub Ahmad, C.S.P., D. C. Gujrat. 16th August, 1972. A highly spoken of official. Although he is not eligible he merits pro motion to the P. S. C. in relaxation of rules in view of his excellent record and the strong recommendation by the D.C. (Sd.) F. K. Bandial, Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division. I entirely agree with my predecessors. I found the official to be efficient, honest and very noble. He enjoys an enviable reputation for his excellent behaviour with his colleagues and the public. In view of his devotion to duty, he has been granted D.C's Sanad. He has a flair for executive work and will prove to be a good revenue officer. I strongly .recommend him for the post of Tehsildar. (S d.) Ijaz Hussain Malik, C. S. P., D.C., Gujrat, 16th March, 1973. A highly spoken of official. Has an agricultural/rural bias, with 'his experience, background and qualifications, he should make a good Tehsildar. (Sd.) F. K. Bandial, Commissioner, RWP Div. 28th March, 1973, Repeated. S. Muhammad Akram Shah, E. A: District Revenue Accountant of my office, is very hardworking and honest official with initiative and drive, He is very useful with executive trend and will prove a good Revenue Officer. I recommend him for the post of Tehsildar (Sd.) S. A. Zulqarnain, D.C., Gujrat. 13th February, 1974. Has an excellent record of service and is highly spoken of by his supe riors and colleagues. On earlier occasions too bee had been recom mended for higher positions and responsibilities that he highly deserved. With the experience and qualification, and agricultural! rural background he should make a good Tehsildar. (Sd.) F. K. Bandial, Commissioner, RWP Div. . 15th February, 1974." In the light of our discussions we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as the appellant did not fall within the category of those officers in whose cases the review under M.L.I. No. 21 was envisaged as the case of the appellant was submitted to the Re view Committee in clear disregard of the rule 7 of 1974 amended rules, I therefore, we set aside the impugned order as without any justification, void and of being no legal effect. The result is that the appeal stands accepted and the appellant would be considered to be a Tehsildar w.e.f. the date of his removal from this post as if he was never so removed. He is entitled to all the back benefits permissible under the rules. A. E. Appeal allowed.