ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Constt. Petition No. D- 71 of 2014

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

 

Present:

 

               Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhter &

               Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Ala, JJ.

 

 

1.     For katcha Peshi.

2.     For hearing of CMA No.210/2014

 

 

Date of Hearing:         15th November, 2017

 

 

                        Mr. Alam Sher Bozdar, Advocate for the petitioner.

 

Mr. Shahryar Imdad Awan, Assistant Attorney General along with Abdul Aziz Hakro Director School Education (Elementary, Secondary, Higher Secondary)Sukkur Region Sukkur.

                                               

 

MUHAMMAD FAISAL KAMAL ALAM, J. Through present constitutional petition, petitioners have challenged the act of respondents particularly respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in respect of making appointment of Primary School, Junior School and High School Teachers in the education department, while ignoring the present petitioners who have secured 96 and 95 marks in the written test and their names were placed at serial Nos. 1 and 2 of the merit list. The undisputed facts are that respondents conducted written test for filling of vacancies of school teachers in Government Boys Higher and Secondary School Mehrabpur district Naushehro Feroze. Both the petitioners are residents of Union Council (U.C Hallani) and being conducted the proceedings and following the eligibility of criteria as laid down by the respondents department, both petitioners took the written test with the aforementioned results.

            Mr. Alam Sher Bozdar learned counsel for the petitioners in arguments have reiterated contents of his petition and laid much emphasis on the discriminatory attitude of respondents towards petitions while stressing that due to “nepotism” and other “extraneous” factors, the petitioners have been deprived of being appointed as Primary School Teachers (P.S.T).

            The contention of the petitioners side has been opposed by Mr. Shehriryar Imdad Awan learned Assistant Advocate General Sindh, representing respondents. As per learned Assistant A.G Sindh the main ground / reason for refusing to take the petitioners as School Teachers is, that the said vacancies were only for male School Teachers and not female. This has been mentioned in paragraph No.7 of the parawise comments of the respondents.

            When queried, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to advertisement available at page 17 through which various posts of School Teachers were advertised and written test were conducted. In Column No.__ it has been specifically mentioned as one of the eligibilities, that the said posts is for both genders, male and female.Ex faciethe stance of respondents has been blied by their own advertisement, which is an undisputed document.

            From the submissions of the learned counsel representing the respective parties and examining of record it is very much clear that the defense of respondents is not only contrary to record but also frivolous. The education and education system is the backbone of every society and the primary education is a back bone of education system. Those who are at the helm of the affairs, if are sincere with the interest of this province, should have ensured that vacancies for School Teachers are filled up purely on merit. But what we are seeing and observing, is a downward train with the factual results. The second ground for refusing to recommend the petitioners are appointment is Primary School Teachers (PST), is interalia there is no vacancy for female candidate at Union Council Hallani.in rebuttal petitioners’ counsel has referred to an appointment letter filed as Annexure D-23 as available at page 133 of Court file, to show that one Fouzia Gul Nangraj, who is a lady, has been appointed as PST in BPS-09 against the vacant vacancy of Union Council Hallani. Interestingly, none of the respondentshas disputed credentials of petitioners and particularly their passing of written test and flying marks but they have admitted to mislead the Court on the aforementioned grounds as well as general routine that the vacancies have been filled up. If the stance of the official respondents have any truth in it, then they should have produced the result of those candidates, who have been appointed as Teachers and have secured more marks then present petitioners.

            It is also necessary to observe that by taking the defense of some policy or a policy matter, jurisdiction of this Court cannot be ousted. No doubt it is the executive which makes and formulates a policy but if the same is not applied in a uniform manner, then a citizen aggrieved of the same can invoke this extra ordinary constitutional jurisdiction. This is in the settled rule of constitutional law and one of the leading judgment on this point reported in P.L.D 1996 Karachi page 1 ( Zuhra and 5 others vs. Government of Sindh, Health department).People of this province are longing for good governance since long, but on account of blatant illegalities committed by officials and due to very tipical bent of jurisdiction, the province is now in dire straints.

            The present petition was allowed by short order on 15.11.2017 and aforementioned are the reasons for the same. Parties to bear their own costs.

                       

 

                                                                           JUDGE

                                                            JUDGE                     

 

                                                                            

Irfan/PA.