' SALIM KHAN, J.---The writ petitions pertaining to the posts of Drawing Masters in District D.I. Khan, pending for disposal today, have common facts and legal issues. These petitions are taken up for arguments, consideration and decisions together. These are as under:--
1. W.P. No,138/05, (Muhammad Saleem Khan and another v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others)
2. W.P. No,141/05 (Rafiq Khan and another v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others).
3. W.P. No,142/05 (Samiullah and others v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others)
4. W.P. No,182/05 (Nairnatullah Khan and another v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others)
5. W.P. No,221/05 (Muhammad Shereen Jan v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others)
6. W.P. No,275/05 (Mehmood Nawaz v. Government of N.-W.F.P. And others)
2. We have heard the arguments and perused the available record as well as the related record of the office of Executive District Officer, Schools and literacy, D.I. Khan, respondent No,2. The advertisement was published on 5-11-2003 and applications were submitted within the prescribed period upto 20-11-2003. The number of vacancies was not shown in the advertisement dated 5-11- 2003, published in the daily 'Khabrain', Peshawar. Seventy five per cent vacancies of Drawing Masters were to be filled on batch-wise/year-wise basis while twenty five per cent vacancies were to be filled on general open merit basis and two per cent vacancies were to be reserved for disabled candidates. Six candidates were appointed vide order dated 27-12-2003 while further four candidates were appointed vide order dated 31-1-2004. Initially eight vacancies were available and two further vacancies became available, thus, -making the total number of available vacancies as ten.
3. In the light of the record, only those candidates could be appointed who had submitted applications upto 20-11-2003 and the candidates who had submitted application after the said date were not entitled to be called for test and interview and were not eligible to be appointed against the said vacancies. Making the cycle of four vacancies each, three candidates, who had applied within the prescribed period and who were qualified and eligible, were to be appointed on the basis of their seniority of batch/year of obtaining certificates, and the fourth vacancy was to be given to the merit quota. Three cycles were to be made for ten vacancies and candidates selected against the merit quota were to be placed at serials Nos.4 and 8 of the roster of vacancies. All the other candidates who had applied in time, and were eligible, had passed the screening test, and had appeared for written test and interview, were to be appointed on the basis of their seniority in batch/year of obtaining certificates, and on their merits within the same batch/year on the basis of marks obtained by them. The respondents committed that the whole list of the petitioners, respondents, and all other candidates who had applied in time, shall be re-checked and the candidates shall be appointed on merits and in accordance with formulas as detailed above.
4. All the other candidates who had either not applied for the vacancies in time, or were not entitled to be appointed in accordance with the mentioned forumula, had to lose the said vacancies/posts.
The respondents amongst such candidates who had not applied, or were not entitled, as above, shall have no right to the appointment in contravention of the above mentioned formula/rules and shall have to lose their services.
5. We, therefore, direct the official respondents to retain the candidates appointed against the merit quota, and fix their seniority at serial Nos.4 and 8 on the roster, and appoint the eligible candidates on the basis of their seniority in batch/year of obtaining certificates of Drawing Masters and their inter se seniority within the batch/year according to their merit after the result of written test and interview, and the services of those who are not falling within the above mentioned formula be terminated with immediate effect from today. We further direct that the writ petitions of such petitioners, who do not have a right to a vacancy/post according to the above mentioned formula shall stand dismissed. It is, however, observed that any appointee, whether he is or is not a party/respondent in this case, and who has been appointed against the post of Drawing Master on or after 27-12-2003 under the directions of this Court or any other Court of competent jurisdiction shall be retained in service and the junior most on the list according to the above formula shall not be appointed or, as case may be, be retained in service.