1983 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Malik Azam Rasool for Respondent. ABDUL HAMID CHAUDHRY (MEMBER).‑Mr. Iqbal Shah, Lecturer, Government Millat Inter College, Multan has filed this appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, wherein he has impleaded the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Education Department, Lahore as respondent.

2. By virtue of this appeal he has prayed that the Punjab Nationalized Colleges (Mens and Women's Section) Teaching Posts Rules, 1974, be set aside and the respondent be directed to nationalize the services of the appellant from 1‑10‑1972 in the scale of Rs. 75011500 equivalent to N. P. S. 18 and to restore appellant as Vice‑Principal with full benefits of arrears of pay.

3. Brief facts of the case are that private Schools and Colleges were nationalized and according to the Gazette notification of Government of the Punjab, Education Department dated 28th October, 1972, published in the Punjab Gazette dated 15‑12‑1972, Millat Inter College, Multan was also listed therein, while through Notification No. S O (NC)‑G/3‑72, dated 4th September, 1972 published in the Punjab Gazette on December 15, 1972, the services of the appellant were nationalized as Vice‑Principal of Millat Intermediate College drawing the pay of Rs. 900 on the following terms and conditions :‑ "These appointments are on purely temporary basis until further orders, and subject to the approval of the Public Service Commission and the Constitutional Provisions regarding the age of superannuation, citizenship and such rules as may be framed in regard to the service conditions of the said staff by the Government." In the year 1972, the Government of Punjab, Education Department constituted a Pay Verification Committee to compile an authentic record of particulars, academic qualifications, date of entry into service, total period of service, pay and pay scales of the staff of the privately managed educational institutions, nationalized under the announced education policy by the President and Chief Martial Law Administrator of Pakistan on 15th March, 1972. Accordingly a comprehensive and detailed list of the staff of nationalized colleges was prepared with full particulars and was circulated by Punjab, Education Department vide No. S. O. (R & B) 2‑5/72, dated 7th November, 1973, mentioning the verified particulars as of 1‑9‑1972 in respect of the teachers, D.P.Es. and Librarians of the Nationalized Colleges in the Punjab. Vide para. 9 of this letter it was mentioned that every effort was made by Professor Muhammad Nawaz and other Members of the Pay Verification Committee to achieve accuracy in preparing these particulars, however, if there was any mistake, in this work, the representation in this connection be made; which be addressed to Prof. Muhammad Nawaz, Head of the Department of Geography, Government College, Lahore (Convenor of the Pay Verification Committee) and should be submitted through proper channel so as to reach him by November 30, 1973. In this list name of the appellant, S. Iqbal Shah was shown at Sr. No. 628 (a) in the grade and pay of Rs. 450‑ 50--1,000 and designation as lecturer on 31‑8‑1972 under column 5, pay Rs. 850 and Rs. 900 on 1‑3‑1972 and 1‑10‑1972 respectively under column 6 and next increment due on 1‑7‑1973 under column

7. In the meanwhile, Punjab Nationalized Colleges (Men's and Women's Section) Teaching Posts, Rules, 1974, were introduced. In accordance with these rules in the year 1975 other Notifications were issued by the Government of the Punjab, Education Department regarding appointments and pay of the lecturers of the nationalized colleges vide No. S. O, (N C) 6‑3/75, dated 6th June, 1975, and even number dated 7th June, 1975, appointing them in N. P. S. 17 and they were allowed to exercise their options for N. P. S. before 31‑7‑1975. The schedule `A' appended with the notification appointing him in N. P. S. 17, showed the name of the appellant, S Iqbal Shah S. No. 2, under Millat Inter, College. Multan, Lecturer in History and his pay Rs. 900 from 1‑7‑1972 and next increment due on 1‑7‑1973. This was in conformity of the earlier particulars collected by the Pay Verification Committee and issued by the Education Department. In the year 1981 i.e., on 16‑3‑1981, the appellant filed a representation to the Secretary Education Department requesting that he was enjoying the scale of Rs. 750/1,500 in March, 1972 as well as at the time of nationaliza tion. According to the M. L. R. 118 the salary as well as status enjoyed by the teachers of nationalized institutions was protected. His scale of pay viz. Rs. 750/1,500 at the time of nationalization was equivalent to N. P. S.

18. He should be given N.P.S. 18 instead of N. P. S. 17 given to him which was contrary to the provisions of M. L. R.

118. His designation to Lecturer could not also be reduced. His representation has not been dis posed of by the respondent although a period of 90 days has since expired. Hence is appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that this case is a simple one. At the time of nationalization the appellant was drawing pay in the scale of Rs. 750/1,500 which was equivalent to N. P. S. 18, hence, he could not be given less pay and grade than this one as per provision of M. L. R. 118 ; but on the contrary the appellant was given N. P. S. 17 as a Lecturer which was unlawful and unjustified. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as laid down under M. L. R. 118, the appellant is entitled to be given pay in the scale of N. P. S. 18 i. e. (Rs. 750/1,500) from 1‑10‑1972 and also status of the appellant as a Vice‑Principal as he was working in that capacity at the time of nationalization and prayed for the restoration of these entitlements. Controverting these arguments, the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the respondent submitted that the appeal is time‑barred as the pay verification committee headed by Prof. Muhammad Nawaz had verified the actual service particulars of the appellant as stood at the time of his nationalization and the same were circulated to all concerned vide letter dated 7‑11‑1973. He further submitted that notifications were issued on 6th June, 1975 and 7th June, 1975, showing him a lecturer and allowing him N. P. S.

17. The appellant accepted all the‑ letters Notifications thus confirming that he was satisfied by the pay, grade and status given to him, on and after nationalization of his institution. Filing his only appeal to the respondent in the year 1981 after 6/8 years would not enlarge time of limitation for filing the present appeal. Moreover no request has been made by the appellant under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Concluding his arguments the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the appeal is hopelessly time‑barred and is not maintainable. Even on the merits, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellant has no case as on nationalization when the particulars of his service were confirmed, he fell into the category of Lecturar which status was given to him (as do post of Vice‑Principal existed/exists now in the staff strength sanctioned by the Government for the Intermediate Colleges) and pay whatever he was drawing at the time of nationalization was given to him as protected under M. L. R. 118.

4. We have given our anxious thoughts and have perused the record of this case very carefully. It is a fact that the appellant was conveyed in the year 1973 by the Government the particulars so collected by the Pay Verification Committee concerning his status as well as pay entitled to him .on nationalization but he never raised any objection to these. He also accepted his status as Lecturer and N. P. S. 17 as notified vide Government Notification dated 6‑6‑1975 and 7‑6‑1975 mentioned in para. 3 of this judg ment. Thus it is clear to us that the appellant was satisfied with the status and pay which was given to him as Lecturer on or after nationalization of his services. We have also satisfied ourselves that he was given the same pay which he was drawing at the time of nationalization of his service on 1‑10‑1972. This matter stood settled in the year 1975 and there was n cause of action to agitate this issue de novo with the respondent by the appellant on 16‑3‑1981 after six years. The appellant's counsel has not bee able to persuade us and to satisfy us for condoning this delay of 6 years, particularly in the absence of any written request so made for condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act. The representation of the appellant filed in the year 1981, would not enlarge the time for limitation which had started running against him in the year 1975, when effective final orders were passed on 6‑6‑1975 and 7‑6‑1975 within the meaning o section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974. Thus, we hold that the appeal is hopelessly time‑barred and is not maintainable. With regards to the merits of the case we have also satisfied ourselves that he was given the same pay on 1‑10‑1972, which he was drawing on 30‑9‑1972, on nationalization. As regarding the status as Lecturer and N. P. S. 17, conveyed and notified to him on 3 occasions during the years 1973 and 1975, the appellant did not raise any objection and felt satisfied with the same. Thus, no injustice has been done with the appellant.

6. Keeping in view the above analysis, we hold that the appeal it hopelessly time‑barred, is without any merits and is dismissed as such. There is no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.