' SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.---Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 it is prayed that "the acts of Departmental Authorities of ignoring the petitioners for promotion as Assistant Director (General Cadres) BS-17 and on the contrary, considering, recommending the cases of respondents Nos.8 to 13 and promoting them as Assistant Director (General Cadre) BS-17 vide impugned order dated 13-8-2002 may graciously be declared as illegal, unlawful, arbitrary, for ulterior motives, without jurisdiction and without lawful authority, consequently of no legal effect." A further declaration is claimed that "only Staff Officer BS-16 are eligible for promotion as Assistant Director (General Cadre) BS-17", a direction is, thus, sought that by reverting 'respondents Nos.8 to 13, the petitioners should be considered for promotion as Assistant Director (General Cadre) BS-17. Parawise comments have been filed by the Lahore Development Authority whereas written statement has been filed by the rest of the respondents.
2. It may be mentioned at this juncture that the petitioners had earlier filed Writ Petition No,11831 of 2002 which in view of the availability of alternate remedy was disposed of in order to enable the respondent-Authority to decide the representation of the petitioners. The said representation was, however, disposed of by the Chairman of the Authority that no such representation was maintainable under Regulation 23 (2) of The Lahore Development Authority (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1978. Instead of addressing arguments as to the maintainability or otherwise of the representation, the learned counsel has argued qua the other aspects of the matter.
3. A preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents as to the maintainability of the petition is that the petitioners had no locus standi to challenge the promotions of the contesting respondents as they (petitioners) were not eligible to be considered for promotion when the cases of promotion of the respondents were considered and were promoted accordingly. It is further pointed out that since the criteria for promotion had been in existence since before the entry of the petitioners in service, they cannot be heard to assail the same. According to the learned counsel, the present petition is liable to be dismissed for the reason that the petitioners who lacked the requisite eligibility of experience at the relevant time, were not "aggrieved persons" as contemplated by Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The assertion of the respondents that the petitioners did not fulfil the eligibility criteria of five years service in Grade-16 envisaged by Schedule "A" to The Lahore Development Authority (Appointment & Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1978 has remained unrebutted. If they themselves were not eligible for promotion as Assistant Director (BS-17) in the year 2002 when the cases of respondents Nos.8 to 13 wete processed, how they could raise any legitimate grievance about the promotion and appointment of the respondents. It may be observed that for maintaining a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and invoking jurisdiction of this Court ,it is to be shown that the person invoking jurisdiction of the Court an "aggrieved person". Reference in this context may be made to Managing Committee, Masjid Muhajreen Lahore v. S. Ijaz Hussain Shah, Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner and 2 others (PLD 1972 Lahore 245), The Punjab Miners Labour Union v. The West Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation, Jhelum PLD 1972 Lahore 489) and Messrs Associated Cement Companies Ltd v. Pakistan through the Commissioner of Income Tax, Lahore Range, Lahore and 7 others (PLD 1978 SC 151). Since the present petitioners lacked the requisite experience and were ineligible to be considered when the respondents were promoted, they have no locus standi to assail their promotion. Suffice it to observe that in case the petitioners have now become eligible they will be entitled tv be considered for promotion on any, vacancy in accordance with law/Regulation.
' The petition accordingly is not maintainable which is rather premature also and is dismissed, with no order as to costs.