2012 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.

In response to respondent No.1's advertisement for recruitment of different posts including Patwari, the petitioner applied for recruitment of Patwari as his qualification is Intermediate with two years experience of Patwar. The interview calls were issued to candidates for 26-7-2006 but on 26-7-2006 no interview was conducted and the interviews were conducted on 26-8-2006 without intimating the candidates. The respondents under political influence allotted quota to the sitting MNA and MPAs for recruitment of Patwari. It is also asserted that the appointment letters of the successful candidates were also delivered to successful candidates by the MNAs and MPAs. Selection committee appointed, respondents Nos.4 to 8, who were having matriculation qualification and respondents Nos.9 to 19 were having no experience of Patwar. It is asserted that proceedings of selection committee, for appointing ineligible candidates be declared without lawful authority.

2. Notices were issued to respondents, the respondents submitted report and parawise comments and admitted as under:

"that vacancies of Patwaris pertaining to Tehsil Chiniot were advertised in the press and date of interview was fixed on 26-7-2006 by the District Officer (Revenue) Jhang. Later on, the date of interview had to be changed due to proceeding of District Officer (Revenue)/Member/Secretary DPC on leave and the date of interview was re-fixed as 26-8-2006. On fixed date the candidates were interviewed and the case was finalized in consultation with the Minister, Law and Parliamentary Affairs/Chairman Cabinet Committee on recruitment. After approval, the orders of successful candidates were issued. The District Selection Committee Jhang made all proceeding impartially. The allegations levelled by the petitioner are wrong and frivolous. Those who satisfied the members of DSC were selected. Higher qualification is accepted but experienced hands superceded them in interview."

3. Learned Additional Advocate-General was confronted with the report of respondents and was asked how the MNA and MPAs have authority under law to interfere for recruitment of Patwaries or other officials, he is unable to reply the same, however he submits that appointments have been finalized, respondents Nos.5 to 20 are performing their duties approximately from the last 4 years and as such at this stage the declaration of their appointment illegal, will not be in the interest of respondents as well as Government.

4. The facts available on record are sufficient to prove that the selection committee has ignored the petitioner only under the illegal influence and interference of Member parliaments, even the merit list prepared shows interpolations. Admittedly the petitioner is having more education as well as experience. He has also performed his duties as Patwari and even he has ministerial experience in the field. 5. .In these circumstances it is appropriate that without declaring the appointment of respondents Nos.4 to 20 illegal, the petitioner may be accommodated. The respondents are directed to accommodate the petitioner against any available post of Patwari.

6. In view of above, this petition is allowed. KMZ/H-10/L Petition allowed.