' MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J.--- This writ petition has been filed under section 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974.
2. It was stated in the writ petition that petitioner completed his training for a candidate Patwari in the year 2005, and a certificate regarding completion of training was issued in his favour on 29-8- 2005. Respondent No,1/Deputy Commissioner, Bagh appointed him as Patwari being a successful candidate, on contract vide order dated 31-10-2006. Due to completion of the project, the contract came to an end in the year 2007-08. Thereafter, respondent No,1 did not conduct the competitive examination for appointment as Patwari and issued a list of candidates for appointment as Patwari (these candidates have been arrayed as respondents Nos.4 to 17). The petitioner applied for a copy of these candidates but respondents Nos.1 to 3 did not issue the same. The petitioner prayed to declare the aforesaid list of candidates Patwari issued without lawful authority and against the provisions of law enforced. It was further prayed to direct respondents Nos.1 to 3 to conduct the examination in accordance with rules for successful Patwari candidates including the petitioner and to issue appointment order of the petitioner.
3. Notices were issued to respondents. Comments were submitted on behalf of respondents Nos.4 to 6, 10 to 12, 16 and 17. It was stated in the comments that the petitioner was not an aggrieved person because he never participated in the test and interview held for the post of Patwari District Bagh. So, the petitioner has got no locus standi to file the instant writ petition. It was admitted that petitioner was selected for the candidate training for the post of Patwari. Respondents Nos.4 to 17 appeared in the examination for the post of Patwari being successful candidates and they have been appointed as Patwari. Respondents prayed to dismiss the writ petition. Official respondents were proceeded exparte. The writ petition was admitted for regular hearing and respondents were directed to file written statement and other documents. Thereafter all the respondents were preceded ex parte and ex-parte arguments were heard by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. After hearing the ex-parte arguments, I have gone through the record available. The record reveals that the petitioner has completed the training for candidate Patwari for District Bagh. A certificate regarding completion of the training has been appended with the writ petition as annexure "PB". Later on, the petitioner was appointed as Patwari on contract basis vide order dated-31-10-2006. Thereafter the petitioner was not allowed to sit in the test and interview for the post of Patwari as a successful candidate and his name was not included in the list of successful candidates. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 was bound by provision of law to allow the petitioner to compete test and interview as a successful candidate. The petitioner did not challenge the validity of appointments of respondents Nos.4 to 17 as Patwari. The petitioner has claimed relief for himself to be treated as a successful candidate and to be allowed to compete the test and interview for the' post of Patwari. This version has not been denied and rebutted by the respondents.
' In the light of what has been stated above, respondents NoS.1 to 3 are directed to treat the petitioner as a successful candidate for test and interview for the post of Patwari and to give him a chance to appear in the test and interview to be conducted in future. The writ petition is accepted to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.