' MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J.--- This writ 'petition has been filed under section 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974. The petitioners stated in the writ petition that the posts of Senior Auditors B-14. Along with other posts were advertised by the Director-General Audit Azad, Jammu and Kashmir in a daily newspaper for various, Districts of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and refugees settled in Pakistan. In the light of above said advertisement, the petitioners applied for the posts of Senior Auditors. Thereafter call letters were issued to the petitioners for written, test. The petitioners participated in the written test conducted by the non-petitioners and qualified the written test. After that call letters were issued for interview to the petitioners along with other successful candidates, for 30-4-2010. On the said date interview was postpon'ed due to unavailability of the Chairman Selection Committee.
2. Thereafter call letters were issued again to the petitioners and the date for interview was fixed by the non-petitioners for 26-7-2010. The non-petitioners did not conduct the interview on 26-7-2010 and petitioners were informed that due to some other official meetings of the members of Selection Committee interviews cannot be conducted. The petitioners were informed orally that interviews will be conducted soon and the petitioners will be informed. The non-petitioners are using delaying tactics. More than 80% selection process has been completed in accordance with the recruitment rules of' Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council.
3. The petitioners stated further in the petition that they have passed and qualified the written test and eligible for the appointment as Senior Auditors. The non - petitioners are going to re-advertise the said posts without any legal authority and justification for the adjustment of their favourites.
The petitioners are aggrieved persons. The petitioners prayed in the petition to direct the non- petitioners to conduct the interview in the light of written test for the posts of Senior Auditors and appoint the petitioners on the said posts. It was further prayed that petitioners be prohibited not to re-advertise the said posts.
4. Written statement was filed by the respondents. The respondents admitted in the written statement that the posts of Senior Auditors B-14 were advertise in newspaper, the written test was conducted by the respondents on 18-4-2010. The successful candidates who qualified the written test were called for interview on 30-4-2010. The interviews could not be held due to some administrative reasons. The call letters for interview were again issued to the petitioners along with other successful candidates for 26-7-2010.
5. The respondents stated further that meanwhile the post of Senior Auditor B-14 was upgraded ' in B-16. Due to this, the competent authority directed to postpone the interview as the recruitment for the post of Senior Auditor, being upgraded in B-16 fell within the preview of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council's Public Service Commission. It was further decided that advertisement made already for the recruitment of Senior Auditors might be withdrawn, recruitment rules be amended and fresh advertisement be made in accordance with new recruitment rules. The new recruitment rules for the post of Senior Auditor are under process. The respondents prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
6. Arguments were heard advanced by the counsel for the parties. Mr. Nazir Hussain Shah Kazmi, the learned counsel for the petitioners repeated the version taken in the petition by the petitioners and argued further that a valuable right has been accrued in favour of petitioners which could not be taken back by a subsequent actioft 80% of the recruitment process has been completed, and the remaining process must be completed in accordance with the advertisement and the rules prevailing at the time of advertisement. The learned counsel requested to issue writ in favour of the petitioners and referred the following precedents in support of the version of the petitioners.
(i) 200 PLC (C.S.) 9, (ii) 1999 PLC (C.S.) 1007 (iii) 2006 SCR 396 (iv) 2009 SCR 530.
7. While controverting the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Tariq Saeed Advocate the learned counsel for the respondents argued that the aforesaid post of Senior Auditor has been upgraded from B-14 to B-16 after the advertisement and written test. Now the authority for the appointment of Senior Auditors in B-16 has been changed. The learned counsel further argued that due to upgradation of the said post, it was a requirement to advertise the recruitment process afresh. The learned counsel requested to dismiss the petition in hand.
8. After hearing the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, perusing the record available and going through the precedents referred, I am of the view that many facts have been admitted by the respondents which are as under:---
(i) That the posts of Senior Auditors B-14 were advertised by the Director-General Audit Azad Jammu and Kashmir in daily, newspaper "Jammu-o-Kashmir" on 6-1-2010.
(ii) That petitioners applied for the said posts and call letters for written test were issued to the petitioner, and the written test was conducted by the non-petitioners on 18-4-2010.
(iii) The petitioners were declared qualified in the written test along with other candidates. The call letters for interview were issued to the petitioners along with other successful candidates for 30-4- 2010.
(iv) The interviews supposed to be held on 30-4-2010 were postponed; and then the date for interview was fixed as 26-7-2010. The interviews to be held on 26-7-2010 were also postponed.
(v) In the meantime, the post of Senior Auditor was upgraded to B-16. Notification of upgradation was issued from the office of Auditor-General on 18-5-2010 and adopted by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir council on 25-5-2010.
(vi) The competent authority directed to postpone the interview as the recruitment for the post of Senior Auditor being upgraded in B-16 fell within the purview of. Public Service Commission. It was further decided by the authority that advertisement made before might be withdrawn, rules for recruitment be amended and fresh advertisement be published in accordance with new rules. The new rules are under process in the office of Auditor-General of Pakistan/Azad Jammu and Kashmir.
9. After admission of the abovementioned facts it is crystal clear that approximately 80% of the recruitment process has been completed by the competent authority and 20% process is left behind to complete the whole process. Now the solitary point to be resolved is whether the process should be completed in accordance with the rules prevalent at the time of advertisement or the authority should wait for framing and approval of new recruitment rules. It has been admitted that new rules were under process. The post of Senior Auditor has been upgraded to B-16, but after the publication of advertisement for the post of Senior Auditor B-14 and written test for the same. The call letters for interview were issued twice and the same were postponed. Notification for upgradation was adopted and issued by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council on 25-5-2010.
Thereafter the call letters for interview were sent, second time to the petitioners including other successful candidates on 6-7-2010 and the date for interview was fixed as 26-7-2010. The interviews were postponed once again. While going through a long process, a valuable right has been accrued to all of those candidates for the posts of Senior Auditors who have qualified the written test, and were sent back hopelessly without interview twice.
10. When a valuable right is accrued to anybody, it cannot be taken back by any subsequent action. This principle has been laid down in a similar case reported as Azad Government v. Syed Abadain Haider (1999 SCR 129). It was observed at page No,132 in the following manner:--- "8. After hearing the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we are of the view that after having qualified the test and interview in accordance with the advertisement issued by the Public Service Commission and the hand-out issued by it for their success a valuable right had accrued in favour of writ petitioners which could not have been taken back by a subsequent action. Even no reason was given by the appellants as to why the quota was curtailed. In the absence of reasons the Court obliged to presume that respondents' right has been adversely affected with mala fide designs."
' In another case reported as Muhammad Imtiaz Khan v. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government (1999 PLC (C.S.) 1007) the same principle has been laid down as under:--- "The P.S.C. Had commenced the selection process by advertising the disputed post and the appellant had duly applied for it. It is nobody's case that the requisition was withdrawn by the Government. Thus a right had come to reside in the appellant that he should be considered for appointment to the advertised post in the light of the rules prevalent at the time when the post was advertised."
11. The principles laid down above are fully applicable to the present case. It is the celebrated principle of law that once a right accrues in favour of a person it cannot be taken back by any subsequent action which culminates in the extinction of the earned legal right. The person having such right must be considered for appointment to the advertised post in the light of the rules prevalent at the time when the post was advertised.
12. In the present case, the post of Senior Auditor was upgraded from B-14 to B-16 on 25-5-2010. The said post was of B-14 when advertised. The written test was conducted before the upgradation of the said post. Even the second time call letters for interview to the petitioners along with other successful candidates were issued on 6-7-2010 after the upgradation of the post. When 80% of-the recruitment process was completed, there was no justification to stop the remaining process, when a valuable right had been accrued in favour of the successful candidates including the petitioners.
Any amendment made in any law would be prospective. Although the upgradation of the aforesaid post was given effect from 3-4-2010, but the advertisement for recruitment was published on 6-1-2010. At the time of the advertisement, the said post was of B-14 and the rules prevalent at the time of advertisement were effective as well.
13. The counsel for the respondents stated during his arguments that the authority for the post of Senior Auditor being in B-16 has been changed. This version has got no footing because the authority for the posts in B11 to B-16 is the same according to an office order of AJ&K Council, appended with the replication filed by the petitioners. ,
14. The AJ&K Council has also admitted the version of the petitioners in a letter sent to Federal Public Service Commission on 23-7-2010 for sending views on the matter under consideration through the instant petition. Para No,4 of the said letter is reproduced as under:- "4. The Audit Department has acute shortage of Senior Auditors. The Council Secretariat is of the view that since major process of recruitment was completed prior to upgradation (as written test having 80 marks whereas interview has 20 marks) and the candidates were called for interviews, therefore, it should continue the process of recruitment. In future the Council Secretariat will get recruitment rules revised and submit requisition to the FPSC/AJ&K Council Public Service Commission."
15. The AJ&K Council has given its willingness to continue the process of recruitment. It is an admitted fact as well that the Senior Auditors already in the service have been promoted to B-16 automatically. Now if the petitioners or other successful candidates are appointed as Senior Auditors, they will be appointed in BPS-14 and thereafter will be promoted in B-16.
' The nutshell of what has been discussed above is that the petitioners cannot be deprived of a valuable right accrued in their favour. Having in view all the circumstances of the present matter, the respondents are directed to conduct the interviews of the petitioners and to consider them for appointment as Senior Auditors in B-14 in the light of rules prevalent at the time of advertisement of the posts. The successful candidates will be appointed in B-14 and thereafter will be benefited by the notification regarding upgradation. The respondents are also directed not to re-advertise the posts of Senior Auditors, but to complete the remaining process.
' Writ petition stands disposed of in the terms indicated above.