1. ' MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J.---The petitioner seeking declaration to the effect:-
(a) "Declaring that the respondents in order to accommodate the persons of their own choice, have changed the method of test from online to written test, which is illegal act in excess of authority, as of no legal effect;
(b) Declaring that the respondents in spite of the fact that the petitioner has qualified the written test, have not been recommended the petitioner for being selected as Civil Engineer (B-17);
(c) Declaring that the respondents while making recommendation of thirteen candidates have adopted the method of pick and choose, favouritism and nepotism therefore, such recommendation by ignoring the petitioner discriminatory as well as in violation of Articles 25 and 27 of the Constitution, therefore, the act of the respondents in such behalf is illegal and without lawful authority."
2. ' Thereby prayed that after declaring the act of the respondents being illegal and in excess of authority, they be directed to recommend him (petitioner) to be appointed as Assistant Engineer (B-17) in Public Health Engineering Department.
3. It is his case that pursuant to advertisement he applied for the post of Assistant Engineer--B-17 from Zhob Zone, whereby he was asked to appear for test/examination on 13-3-2008, which was scheduled to be held online. He along with other candidates appeared in the exams, which was not held online, rather they were informed that due to some technical fault, tests are to be held in writing. It was a surprise when the question papers were circulated, which were already prepared and in custody of the official respondents. This act shows mala fide on the part of official respondents only to accommodate their favourite ones, otherwise it was not possible. It is further his case that he was declared successful as per results announced in newspapers. Whereafter final result was announced on 6-5-2008 on basis of examination and viva, only 13 candidates were declared to have qualified for appointment despite the fact that 15 vacancies were announced.
4. However, respondent No,12 was selected conditionally, but said criteria was not adopted in his case. Despite efforts the official respondents are reluctant to redress his grievance. As such the act of ignoring him and recommending the names of other candidates, the official respondents adopted the method of pick and choose, favouritism and nepotism, hence present petition.
5. ' In their reply respondents Nos.1 and 2 strongly denied the contention of the petitioner. It is their contention that in response to advertisement 50 candidates including petitioner applied, out of whom 41 were called for MCQs Test, while 37 candidates appeared on 13-3-2008, out of whom 24 were declared qualified for viva voce, whereafter against two posts of Zhob Zone, two candidates were recommended. Further, due to some technical reasons tests of all trades were conducted manually. No one including the petitioner raised objection on the same. Further, the suitability of a candidate is determined by the Commission on basis of written MCQs and viva voce Test, though the petitioner qualified the written test, but failed to qualify viva voce, therefore, he was not recommended. As far as Shakarullah son of Haji Noorullah is concerned, he was recommended conditionally against the seat of Mekran Zone subject to relaxation of zonal quota by the Competent Authority.
6. The petitioner on basis of his success in written test, sought declaration and direction to be given to the respondents so that recommendation be made for his appointment as Assistant Engineer B-17 in Public Health Engineering Department. He is completely silent about his result to the extent of viva voce which was also conducted by the B Commission. As per respondents suitability of a candidate is determined on basis of both written and viva voce test. This assertion is not contested from side of the petitioner. He also not denied the assertion that he (petitioner) could not qualify the viva voce test. Apart from the same the petitioner though mentioned in the petition that he along with respondents Nos.3 to 15 participated in written test along with other candidates, but title of instant petition reveals that except respondents Nos.1 and 2 i.e, Balochistan Public Service Commission there is no other respondent to the petition.
7. Though the petitioner has raised allegation of favouritism and nepotism on the part of respondents, but it seems to be mere assertion, as no material relating to the same is produced before this Court. It is not his case that he was on merits while depriving him candidate of low in merit is recommended by the Commission, either zonal allocation is violated or he has been deprived of his right. He has rather prayed for declaring the recommendation made by the respondents in respect of 13 candidates being discriminatory and in violation of law and Constitution. He has placed on record the said recommendation which bears date 6-5-2008.
8. Allowing this relief means that the persons thereby appointed on basis of such recommendation would be placed out of service, as it is most probable that such recommended candidates, who are not before this Court, may have already been appointed by the competent Authority, who is also not before this Court. Without giving them opportunity of being heard, no such order can be passed, which surely affect their right.
9. ' The petitioner has completely failed to make out case in his favour; petition is dismissed being without merits.