IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH

CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Present:

Irshad Ali Shah, J.

Agha Faisal, J.

CP D1242 of 2015               :           Mst. Aisha vs.

Secretary Education & others

For the Petitioner                 :           Mr. Ali Azhar Tunio, Advocate.

For the Respondents          :           Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Addl. A.G.

Dates of hearing                  :           23.02.2022.

Date of announcement      :           23.02.2022.

ORDER

Agha Faisal, J.         Briefly stated, the petitioner participated in a competitive process for appointment as Primary School Teacher and claimed to have topped the merit list in her respective union council. Consequent to the issuance of an initial offer, the same was retracted by the relevant District Recruitment Committee as it transpired that another candidate, not impleaded herein by the petitioner, had obtained higher marks but had erroneously been earlier considered in another union council. The respondents rectified the error and the said person was then employed as admittedly she had scored higher marks then the petitioner.

2. Petitioner’s counsel has controverted the position taken by the official respondents and submitted that ade novo investigation/ determination of the factual dispute be undertaken by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.  Learned Addl. A.G. submitted that initial offer to the petitioner was bonafide mistake, duly rectified by the District Recruitment Committee (being the competent authority) with notice to all concerned and in accordance with the policy.

3. Heard and perused. It is an admitted fact that the marks scored by the petitioner were lower than that obtained by the person whose services were ultimately engaged. It is also admitted that there was only one vacancy in the relevant union council. The only issue that remained was whether both persons belonged to the same union council or otherwise and the said question has been duly addressed by the respondents and no cavil has been articulated to the jurisdiction thereof or procedure adopted in such regard.  A denovo determination of the union council status of a third person, admittedly not impleaded herein, falls within the realm of disputed facts requiring detailed enquiry, not amenable within the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

4. In so far as the earlier, since retracted, offer to the petitioner is concerned, it is settled law that a wrong benefit, extended beyond the law / policy, may not be perpetuated; as was recently reiterated by the august Supreme Court in Azam Shah[1].

5. In view hereof this petition is found to be devoid of merit, hence, dismissed along with all pending applications.

                                                                   JUDGE

JUDGE

---

[1] Per Muhammad Ali Mazhar J in Syed Azam Shah vs. Federation (Civil Appeal 764 of 2021); Judgment dated 19.11.2021.