IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR

W. P No._______/2015

Muhammad Ayaz, Acting Director, Monitoring & Evaluation M&E

Dte. P & D Department Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

.………………Petitioner

Versus

1. Director General Dte. of Monitoring & Evaluation, P & D Department, Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

2. Secretary, P & D Department, Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

3. Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

4. Govt. of KPK through Chief Secretary……………..Respondents

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN FOR THE APPOINTMENT AS DIRECTOR, MONITORING & EVALUATION, P&D DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF KPK ON REGULAR BASIS

PRAYER AND CLAIM IN PETITION:-

IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT STAY MAY BE GRANTED TO CONTINUE

THE ACTING POST OF DIRECTOR MONITORING & EVALUATION. THE

RECRUITMENT PROCESS MAY BE STOPPED AND ORDER MAY BE

ISSUED TO THE APPOINTMENT AS DIRECTOR M & E ON MERIT BASIS

W.E.F. 02.07.2012 WITH FULL BENEFITS.

Respectfully submitted as under:

= 1 =

1. The facts, in short, relevant to the instant writ petition are that

the post of Director Monitoring & Evaluation, P&D Department

became vacant during the month of April 2011 on the

resignation of Mr. Ahmad Ali the than Director.

2. That the petitioner Mr. Muhammad Ayaz s/o Berader Khan was

appointed as Director M & E vide Office Order No. P&D/M &

E/3-1/1/2009-10/5861-65 dated 04.05.2011 and assumed the

charge of the post of Director Monitoring & Evolution in M & E

Dte. Peshawar in acting charge basis in his own pay scale and

till date working on the position with full zeal & zest and entire

satisfaction of the superiors.

3. That after carrying out the necessary procedure, first the post

advertized on ……… in order to fill the post on regular basis.

The petitioner / acting Director also applied alongwith other

candidates but unfortunately due to the molafide intention of

the authorities concerned, the position was re-advertised

without any lawful justification. It is relevant to mention that

in the received applications / CVs, the acting Director was on

top with relevant experience and academic record.

4. That after re-advertisement through P.O Box No…… date……

a number of applications were received and again the acting

Director applied being the most suitable and eligible

candidate but again the blue eyed candidates of the

authorities were far behind as compare the petitioner and

once again all the rules and regulation violated and

advertisement was cancelled without any lawful justification,

which resultantly loss the government exchequer including

the violation of rights of the petitioner.

= 2 =

5. That for 3rd time the position was advertised vide dated …….

This time the short listing process was completed and call

letters for interview were also issued to eligible candidates

including the petitioner.

6. That the interview was held on 02.07.2012, wherein the

petitioner was topped on the merit list with highest score of

79 marks while 2nd candidate Mr. Mian Sajid Gul secured 70

marks. It will be very helpful to mention that only 8 marks

were kept for interview. With due apology having no uncle the

petitioner, hence the candidate with 65 marks namely Mr.

Arshad Zia was tried to be selected as successful candidate

and may be the decision was not too easy for the authorities,

the selection committee decided to re-advertise the position.

7. That the petitioner against such unlawful decision of the

Committee, submitted various appeals at different level

including D,G M&E, ACS, CS, Minister for P&D and Chief

Minister of KPK but all in vain and finally after passing more

than three years period, the post re-advertised in national

press.

8. That the present situation is that the petitioner again applied

and remained on the top of the list but the short listing

committee wrongly short listed an ineligible candidate namely

Mr. Shehzad on special directives from higher ups. So, once

again there is chance to violate the rights of the petitioner

and breach rules and regulation.

Grounds:-

a. That making advertisement again and again is out of the

routine procedure, without any lawful justification are bad in

the eyes of law, facts and material available on the record;

= 3 =

hence the current process may be stopped and the acting

Director / petitioner allowed to continue the position till the

decision of the Honorable High Court.

b. That the petitioner fulfilled all the required criteria and eligible

/ qualified for the post and every times, remain on top but due

to political influence and personal interest of the authorities

concerned the position is re-advertised, which is not justifiable

and against the general recruitment policy.

c. That the petitioner working on the post as above since May-

2011 with the entire satisfaction of the superiors, which is

cogent proof of his capability and professional soundness.

d. That the present process and short listing is also controversial

and against the merit policy.

e. That ineligible candidate namely Mr. Shehzad has been short

listed and likely to be appointed as Director M&E, which will

resultantly destroy the performance of the Department as he

not having the minimum required experience for the said

post, totally contrary to the ground of reality and merit.

g. That all appeal submitted by the petitioner at various forum

were not heard, hence there was no other option except to

approach this Honrable Court for seeking justice.

= 4 =

h. That the other grounds relating to the subject matter of Writ

Petition will be discussed and taken at the time of argument

before this Hon’ble Court.

Prayer:

Under the circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that

stay may be granted to continue the acting post of

Director monitoring & evaluation and the recruitment

process may be stopped and order may be issued to the

concerned department for appointment as Director M &

E on merit basis w.e.f. 02.07.2012 with full benefits.

Any other relief, which this Honorable Court may

deem proper and expedient, in the interest of justice, be

also granted to the appellant.

PETITIONER

Muhammad Ayaz, Acting Director, Monitering & Evaluation M&E

Dte. P&D Department Govt. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Through

(Barrister, Zahid Khattak)Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan.

= 5 =