| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 1628 2006 SLD 1628 2006 PLC 269 |
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petitions Nos.81, 170 of 2004, 33, 25, 69, 86, 168, 172, 196, 199, 232, 233, 286, 290, 295, 307 & 328 of 2005 decided on 15-12-2005.
SALIM KHAN AND MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Writ Petitions Nos.81, 170 of 2004, 33, 25, 69, 86, 168, 172, 196, 199, 232, 233, 286, 290, 295, 307 & 328 of 2005 decided on 15-12-2005.
SALIM KHAN AND MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
AZIZUR-REHMAN and 2 others
VS
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT through Secretary Education, Government of N.W.F.P. Peshawar and 9 others AZIZUR-REHMAN and 2 others vs EDUCATION DEPARTMENT through Secretary Education, Government of N.W.F.P. Peshawar and 9 others
Law:
Section:
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Civil service---Appointment---In response to advertisement in newspaper regarding appointment of C.T. Teachers, applications were received and processed---Rules were provided for filling up vacancies on basis of 75% on year-wise/batch wise basis and 25% on merit basis---Two\per cent posts were reserved for disabled persons---Authorities notified certain appointments as a result of selection process---Initially twenty persons were appointed out of them five persons were appointed on merit, one against a disabled quota and fourteen persons were appointed on posts reserved for year wise/batch-wise quota---Certain other appointments were also made on different dates--Petitioners did not have any objection with regard to earlier appointment of 20 persons, but had challenged the subsequent appointments made on different dates on the ground that they were senior in batch, but had been discriminated and people junior in batch had been appointed---Disputed subsequent appointments were made without taking into account batch-wise seniority and in some cases, candidates were appointed who did not even apply for appointment or did not participate in selection process of test and interview---Said subsequent appointments were legally defective being, based on excessive use of authority and discriminative to rights vested in some of petitioners under relevant rules---Petitions of all those petitioners, who were eligible on the basis of year-wise seniority, would be deemed to have been allowed and where year-wise seniority did not entitle petitioners to be appointed 'against available vacancies, would be deemed to have been dismissed. Saleemullah Khan Ranazai for Petitioners. Muhammad Sharif Chaudhry D.A.-G. along with Abdur Rahman Khan EDO DI Khan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 15th December, 2005. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.---This judgment shall also dispose of the following writ petitions as common questions of law are involved in all these cases:- 1. W.P. No. 170/2004, (2) W.P. No.33/2005. (3) W.P. No.25/2005. (4) W.P. No.69/2005. (5) W.P. No.86/2005. (6) W.P. No.168/2005. (7) W.P.…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492