ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

C.P D- 226 of 2013

______________________________________________________________________ DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________

1. For katcha Peshi.

2. For hearing of CMA 683/2013.

(Notice issued returned)

Present:

Mr.Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi &

Mr.Justice Ghulam Qadir Leghari.

02.03.2016

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro, advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, Additional A.G a/w Ghulam Hyder D.E.O Ele/Higher Secondary, Khairpur.

O R D E R

Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi J. Through instant petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs :

a) To issue writ in favour of petitioners declaring thereby the acts of respondents of making recruitment to the posts of Drawing Teachers without declaring the result of written test and issuing merit list as illegal, abinitio, null and void and without any lawful authority.

b) To direct the respondents to produce entire record of recruitment before this Court, and after examining the record this Court may be pleased to cancel the appointment orders issued without adopting the procedure as laid down under the law.

c) To direct the respondents, get degrees of all the candidates verified from the concerned institutions.

d) To direct the respondents to issue appointment order to the petitioners on merit, in accordance with law.

Pursuant to the notices, comments have been filed on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4, wherein it has been stated that the petitioners were never declared as qualified candidates, therefore, they were not found entitled for the post of Drawing Teachers. Learned Additional A.G further submits that in the similar circumstances, the petition No.D-3404 of 2013 along with other petitions were filed before principal seat of this Court and decided vide order dated 17.03.2015, wherein petitioners were directed to approach Sindh Service Tribunal for decision on merits. In support of his contention, learned A.A.G has referred to comments filed by respondent No.4 in respect of para No.8, which are reproduced as under:-

“In the light of the above observations of Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan, the above titled petitions are to be treated as departmental appeals and the comments/statements filed by the respondents shall be treated as order on the departmental appeals and in terms of paragraph 156 of the above mentioned judgment dated 5.1.2015 in Civil Revision Petition No.193 of 2013 etc. Office is directed to remit these petitions to the Sindh Service Tribunal for its decision on merits. Parties and their counsel should appear before the Tribunal on 8.4.2015”

While confronted with such position, learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners will be satisfied if the respondents may be directed to verify the claim of the petitioners and if they are found to be eligible, their case may be considered in accordance with law.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and comments filed on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4. From perusal of record, it appears that the petitioners have not placed on record any document to suggest that either the petitioners were eligible or were declared as successful candidates to be appointed as Drawing Teachers in respondents department, pursuant to advertisement published on 15.04.2012 by the Directorate of School Education Sukkur Region Sukkur, whereas the vague allegations have been made with regard to the entire process of recruitment. Prima facie it appears that by disputing the appointments made in the year 2012-2013 by respondents, the petitioners have attempted to seek cancellation of appointment of large number of candidates, who as per comments, were declared as successful candidates in the merit list issued by respondents, however, the petitioners have not impleaded them as party.

In view of hereinabove facts and circumstances of the case, when the disputed facts have been agitated by the petitioners, we are not inclined to interfere in the recruitment process carried out by District Education Officer, Khairpur in the year 2012 at this stage. Accordingly, instant petition being misconceived is dismissed along with listed application.

However, dismissal of this petition will not affect the proceedings, if any, pending before any competent Court of jurisdiction or Tribunal in respect of recruitment process carried out by District Education Officer Khairpur in the year 2012 and the same may be decided on its own merits.

J U D G E

`

Irfan/PA J U D G E