ORDER SHEET.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR.
C.P No.D-2878/2014.
Before: Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi &
Ghulam Qadir Laghari-JJ.
1. For katcha peshi.
2. For hearing of CMA 9960/2014.
Mr. Zafar Ali Eidan Mangi advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar Addl.A.G.
Date of hearing:- 16-03-2016
Date of order;- 16-03-2016
ORDER.
Through instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-
“a) To direct the respondents No. 1 to 4 to issue offer order to petitioner for the post of PST (Primary School Teacher) because petitioner fulfill the all requirement and secured 76 marks and declared as successful candidate and the name of the petitioner on the top of the seniority list of disable person but petitioner is deliberately ignored and persons who was on the serial No.2,3 were appointed.
b) To restrain the respondent No. 1 to 4 to not issue offer order to the candidates illegally and unlawfully without given priority to the candidates who secured highest marks in NTS Test till final disposal of this petition.”
2. Notices were issued to the respondents as well as AAG, pursuant to which learned Addl. A.G has filed parawise comments on behalf of respondent No.3 District Education Officer (Primary), Khairpur.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that respondent No.1 issued advertisement dated 19.04.2012 for vacant posts of Teachers in Sindh Education Department for the Posts of PST and HST on disabled quota. Thereafter, per learned counsel, the petitioner as per terms and conditions of advertisement submitted the required Educational documents and applied for the post of Primary School Teacher on for disable quota. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner secured first position in District Khairpur and obtained 76 marks and was declared as successful candidate in the test conducted by NTS for the post of PST and the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No.1 in merit/seniority list. It has been further contended that the petitioner is fully competent and eligible to be appointed on the post of PST on Disable quota as his name appeared on top of the merit list of successful candidates. However, according to learned counsel, instead of issuing appointment order in favour of petitioner, the candidates who admittedly secured less marks i.e. 70 and 63 marks, have been given appointment as PST. Per learned counsel, petitioner has been deliberately and malafidely being put off by the respondents as the respondents have not issued appointment letter to the petitioner as on a flimsy ground that petitioner did not file all the documents i.e. PRC/DRC and disability certificate along with application within given time, whereas, according to learned counsel, there was no cut off date given in the Advertisement for submitting the above referred documents. He has further argued that the petitioner has been running from pillor to post, but all in vain, therefore, petitioner was left with no option but to approach this Hon'ble Court by filing instant petition for redressal of his grievance.
4. Conversely, learned Addl. A. G has argued that Education and Literacy Department, Government of Sindh published an advertisement on 19.04.2012 in various Newspapers i.e. Kawish, Jang & Dawn inviting the candidates who possess the qualification of HSC or equivalent at least in second division to submit their applications along with relevant documents i.e. Domicile & PRC form “D” up to 20.05.2012 (extended one month upto 20.06.2012). He further argued that though the petitioner admittedly secured the maximum marks i.e. 76 marks in NTS test, however, he has submitted the Disability Certificate which was issued on 04.07.2013. Domicile No.DMC-MAJ-00120609 dated 29.03.2013 after the due date of filing applications. Learned Addl. A. G, submits that since the petitioner failed to submit above documents within time, therefore, he was not considered for his appointment as PST teacher, whereas, there is no malafide on the part of respondents.
5. We have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl.A.G and perused the record. During course of hearing of instant petition on 26.01.2016 DEO (Primary) Khairpur and DSE (Primary) Sukkur shown their appearance and candidly stated that if the above referred documents would have been filed in given time, the petitioner would have been given appointment on priority as his name appeared on top of the merit list.
6. Perusal of record reflects that the petitioner, pursuant to the advertisement dated 19.04.2012 published in various Newspapers applied for the post of PST on disable quota and was accordingly called to appear in the NTS test on a given date. Thereafter, result was announced and merit list was issued, according to which petitioner got First position by securing 76 marks in District Khairpur, which fact has not been disputed by the respondents However, it appears that the petitioner was not issued appointment letter merely on the ground that the requisite documents have been submitted by the petitioner after due date. Such plea of respondents for non-issuance of appointment letter to the petitioner appears to be mis-conceived and without any lawful basis, for the reason that if the application of petitioner would have been incomplete, the same could have been rejected on this account, and the respondents would not have allowed the petitioner to appear in the NTS test. In the absence of any objection by respondents to this effect at the time of recruitment process, it can be presumed that once, the petitioner's application was found to be correct and complete, thereafter, a letter was issued to the petitioner to appear in the NTS test and interview. Moreover, the respondents could not refer to any such condition imposed in the advertisement according to which, some cut off date would have been given, on the expiry of which date, a candidate would have been estopped from submitting the documents as referred to hereinabove. It has been informed that result was accounted on 04.04.2013 and final list was published on 20.07.2013 whereas DRC and PRC have been issued to the petitioner on 29.03.2013. The petitioner, who secured the highest i.e. 76 marks and was on top in the merit list, has not been appointed, whereas, the candidates who secured lesser marks in the test have been appointed by the respondents, which amounts to discrimination and violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner as guaranteed by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Moreover, it is settled legal position that a person should not be deprived of his legal right on mere technicalities. Mere delayed submission of few documents, if at all, which have not even been disputed by the respondents in the instant case, cannot disentitle a successful candidate who has secured the highest marks on merits and is eligible to be appointed on disabled quota as PST teacher. Moreover, it has also come on record that all the required documents were submitted by the petitioner before issuance of final result by respondents. In the present case, the respondents deliberately and malafidely declined the petitioner from his lawful right of being given appointment for the post of PST on disabled quota, and thus made the life of petitioner miserable who is running from pillar to post to get justice and has eventually approached this court for enforcement of such right.
7. In view of hereinabove peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and the admitted position regarding eligibility of petitioner who secured highest marks on merits, instant petition was allowed vide our short order dated 16.03.2016 and these are the reasons for such short order. We have been informed that post of PST teacher is lying vacant pursuant to resign of one Liaqat Ali Khaskheli from such post, therefore, it is expected that needful shall be done at an early date, however, not letter than a period of two months, whereafter, compliance report may be furnished by respondents No. 2 and 3 through Incharge Additional Registrar of this Court.
Judge
Judge