' The post of Principal Government College of Education (W), Lahore was lying vacant. On 22-7- 2003 a directive was issued by the Chief Minister's Secretariat that the Chief Minister had been pleased to approve the posting of Professor Abida Tanvir, Principal, Government College for Women, Wandat Colony, Lahore as Principal, Government College of Education for Women, Lahore.
Since the petitioner was also desirous of posting there, she made an application to the Secretary, Education, Government of the Punjab, Lahore that she may be posted as Principal Government College of Education for Women, Lahore. As per the averments in the petition, she approached the Chief Minister Punjab for this purpose. As a sequel Chief Minister's Secretariat issued a directive dated 8-4-2004 that the name of the petitioner may be included in the summary, being put up to the Chief Minister for. Posting of Principal, Government College of Education for Women, Lahore. On 24-4-2004, notification issued by the Government of the Punjab Services and General Administration Department is said to have surprised the petitioner whereby respondent No.4 Dr. Mrs. Zamurrad Salman, (BS-20/Higher Education), Principal Government Degree College, Baghbanpura, Lahore was transferred and posted as Principal, Government College of Education for Women, Lahore against an existing vacancy "subject to the NOC of the University of Education, Lahore as per Schedule (section 41) Ordinance,2002 of University of Education, Lahore". In turn the University of Education, Lahore issued notification dated 26-4-2004. Admittedly respondent No.4 has taken charge of the post accordingly. Her appointment is assailed through this petition by Dr. Zakria Tariq, Principal, Government Ayesha Degree College, Timber Market, Ravi Road, Lahore on various grounds such as that respondent No.4 did not possess the requisite qualification whose posting has been made in violation of the provisions of University of Education, Lahore Ordinance, 2002.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel that the power of appointment vested only in the University of Lahore who had to fill the vacancy by following the procedure laid down by the Ordinance. It is contended that the selection process envisaged by the Ordinance, in particular clause 7 of rule 6 of Schedule to section 41 thereof has been violated in making such an appointment. In order to show that the petiton is competent before this Court and that such an appointment/posting, which according to the petitioner is contrary to law, the Court can interfere, reference has been made to Dr. Imtiaz Elahi Piracha v. Government of Punjab and others (2004 PLC (C.S.) 705), Mushtaq Ahmad Mohal and others v. The Honourable Lahore High Court, Lahore and others (1997 SCMR 1043),.Capt. (Retd.) Muhammad Naseem Hijazi v. Province of Punjab through Secretary, Housing and Physical Planning and 2 others (2000 SCMR 1720), Rana Habib-ur-Rehman Khan Advocate v. Government of the Punjab through Chief Secretary, Civil Secretariat, Lahore and 4 others (2001 PLC (C.S.) 450), Abdul Bashir and 9 others v. Government of Balochistan through Chief Secretary, Civil Secretariat, Quetta and 3 others (2001 PLC (C.S.) 771), Dr. Muhammad Azhar v. Dr. Tariq Mahmood Malik and 2 others (2002 PLC (C.S.) 57) and Dr. Farhat Saleemi v. Government of Punjab through Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Lahore and 3 others (2003 PLC (C.S.) 104).
3. The report and comments have been submitted by the respondents. The petition is opposed by the learned counsel for the University of Education with reference to notification dated 26-4-2004 that the posting of respondent No.4 Was a "provisional" arrangement, which was subject to the conditions mentioned therein, including the approval of the Syndicate. It is contended that the posting of respondent No.4 was consistent with the decision of the Syndicate taken in its 4th meeting of 4-10-2003, circulated on 14-10-2003, which envisages that "If there was any proposal for the placement of a staff at the University of Education, Lahore from the Government of the Punjab, it would be presented to the Syndicate for its consideration". It is thus contended that such a proposal could be made by the Government of Punjab which was, however, subject to the approval of the Syndicate of the University that is why the posting of respondent No.4 was made provisionally and is yet to be finalized on due consideration by the Syndicate. The learned Additional Advocate General Punjab and the learned counsel for respondent No.4 have also adopted a similar stance in the matter. According to them in such circumstances the writ petition was incompetent and premature.
4. In view of the order that I propose to make in this matter I would refrain from dilating and dealing with the respective stance of the parties and contentions of the learned counsel inasmuch as that the posting of respondent No.4 has yet not been finalized. It is a "provisional" arrangement that is why emphasis has been laid in notification dated 24-4-2004 that the same was subject to the NOC of University of Education. The University of Education made it further conditional vide notification dated 26-4-2004, which due to its relevance is reproduced and reads as follows:-- "UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION LAHORE April 26, 2004. ' otification No. UE/Addl. Dir(Coord)/1281 ' Kindly refer to the Services and General Administration Department, Government of the . Punjab letter No.S.O. (E-1), 1-34/2001 dated April 24: 2004 .
' Dr. Mrs. Zamurrad Salman, Professor, Principal Government Degree College Baghbanpura; Lahore (BS-20), is provisionally allowed to join as Professor in (BS-20) at Government College of Education (W), Lahore on the following conditions subject to the final decision of the Syndicate:--
1. The appointment will be subject to the approval of the Syndicate.
2. She will draw normal pay and allowances and will not claim any deputation pay and allowances etc.
3. That offer will not be construed as the commitment on behalf of the University of Education for the appointment unless it is approved by the Syndicate.
' Lt. Col (Retd.) Muhammad Rafique Addl. Dir (Coord)"
' On 6-5-2004 another Notification was issued by the University that:- "UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION LAHORE ' NOTIFICATION.
' No. UE/Add Dir (Coord)/1318.---In exercise of powers vested in him under subsection (3), section 14, University of Educa,tion, Lahore Ordinance 2002, the Vice-Chancellor, University of Education, Lahore is pleased to appoint Dr. Mrs. Zamurrad Salman, to act for the Principal of University College of Education (W), Lahore till further orders.
Lt. Col. (Retd)
(Muhammad Rafique)
Additional Director (Coord)"
(Emphasis supplied by underlining the relevant portions)..
' It all goes to show the transitory nature of posting of respondent No.4, which was subject to NOC by the University. The University made it "subject to the approval of the Syndicate" and that the "offer will not be construed as the commitment on behalf of the University of Education for the appointment unless it is, approved by the Syndicate". The notification of 6-5-2004 further restricted the scope of posting that it was made "till further orders". The tenor of these orders and notifications leave no doubt whatsoever that it is merely a provisional arrangement. There is no cavil that the power to make such appointment and posting falls within the powers and duties of the Syndicate in view of section 20 of the Ordinance, Since the matter is yet to be considered and decided by the high-powered body in the University i.e. The Syndicate comprising a Judge- of this Court, there is no doubt left that the matter will receive due consideration by such a body who will take decision consistent with the law obtaining on the subject. In such milieu, I am not inclined td interfere with the matter in writ jurisdiction.
' Insofar as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Government of Punjab had nothing to do with the matter and it was the University alone, which could have initiated the process and made the appointment, suffice it to observe that the petitioner herself had made an application and requested for such a posting and consideration of her case by the Government of Punjab. It would not entitle her to raise any such plea, as in writ jurisdiction the conduct of the petitioner assumes much relevance. Moreover the University acted in accord with the Syndicate decision dated 14-10-2003 in receiving such a request of the Government of Punjab. I am informed that the Syndicate meeting is scheduled to be held in the near future. It is hoped and expected that this matter will be considered and decided by the Syndicate in the forthcoming meeting and in case any of the parties makes representation, the same will receive its due consideration in accordance with law.
' In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as misconceived, in view of the observations made above. No order as to costs.