ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

C.P.No.D-2117 of 2011

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

· For orders on office objections “A”.

· For hearing of main case.

14.11.2018

                        Mr. Ali Nawaz Junejo, Advocate for the petitioner.

                        Mr.Abid Hussain Qadri, State Counsel

                                                *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The petitioner by way of instant constitutional petition has prayed for the following relief;

a) Direct the respondent No.1 to produce the list of successful candidates who were appointed during the year 2007 and 2008 before this Honourable Court.

b) That after verifying the list, the Honourable Court further be pleased to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as police constable in Sindh police.

c) Direct the respondents that whenever the vacancies exist the petitioner be appointed as Police Constable on priority basis without conducting any test or interview”.

2.                    The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant constitutional petition are that the applications were invited by Sindh Police for appointment of Police Constables for District Jacobabad. The petitioner applied for the same, qualified the physical, written and medical test but was not appointed. Consequently, the petitioner filed a complaint with Regional Director, Provincial Ombudsman, Regional Office at Jacobabad and then filed the instant constitutional petition for grant of relief, as is detailed above.

3.                    It was inter-alia submitted by S.S.P Jacobabad and DIG Larkana in their written objection/reply/statement that 369 candidates qualified the recruitment process wherein the name of the petitioner was placed at Serial No.269 of the merit list, out of them, only 260 such posts being vacant were filled-in.   

4.                    It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has qualified the recruitment process as such he was having legitimate right to have been appointed as Police Constable. If he could not be appointed at present, then the respondents to be directed to appoint the petitioner in future, without any test or interview, whenever the post of police constable becomes vacant.

5.                    Learned State Counsel sought for dismissal of the instant constitutional petition by contending that the petitioner has got no legitimate right to be appointed as Police constable over and above the persons with better position to him.

6.                    We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

7.                    The list of the successful candidates has been furnished by the respondents, wherein the name of the petitioner is placed at Serial No.269. Only 260 candidates as per written/reply/statement furnished by respondents have been appointed. Beyond 260 candidates, the rest of candidates are presumed to have failed impliedly. In that situation, no direction could be issued by this Court for appointment of the petitioner as police constable over and above the candidates, who were having better position to him. No direction could be issued against the respondents for appointment of the petitioner against the post of police constable in Sindh Police for District Jacobabad, which is likely to be become vacant in future. If such direction is issued then it would deprive the right of contest to the aspiring candidates, and it would be against the mandate of Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic of Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which call for equal treatment to all the citizens.

8.                    In case of Province of Sindh Vs. Muhammad Taqi Shah (2018 SCMR-1607), it has been held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that;

“It must be kept in mind that Public Service Commission, may it be federal or provincial is a constitutional body created in terms of Article 242 of the Constitution to ensure that the process of appointments into the civil service is transparent, merit based through competitive process to provide equal opportunity to all the citizens of participate which not only create confidence in the system but earn respect for the meritorious selection and for this very reason this Court through its various pronouncements has held that the process provided in federal and provincial statues for appointment through public Service Commission is for public good and any deviation to bypass the competitive process would violate the right of equal treatment to the citizens of this country as guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution and, therefore, would not be sustained”.    

9.                    Prima facie, the petitioner has failed to make out a clear case of infringement of his right or establishing malafide on the part of official respondents in following the recruitment procedure which is sufficient for dismissal of his constitutional petition.

10.                  Above are reasons of our short order dated 14.11.2018 whereby the instant constitutional petition was dismissed.

                                              JUDGE

                                                                                           JUDGE

..