' ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J.--- The petitioner Mst. Rukhsana seeks the annulment of impugned order No,347-53 dated 10-7-2014, issued by the respondent No,3 and sought restoration of her appointment order dated 30-6-2014, which has been unlawfully withdrawn by the respondent.
2. Arguments heard and record perused.
3. A perusal of record reveals that respondent No,3, advertised some posts in Daily Newspaper "Aaj" dated 7-3-2014 including P.E.T in different schools situated in District Swat. The petitioner and respondent No,4 also applied for that, after going through NTS test and other necessary formalities were also observed, the merit list was prepared by the respondents, resulting into appointment of the petitioner vide order dated 30-6-2014, issued by respondent No,3 and was posted at GGMS Shinkad, consequent upon the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee. The term and condition No,8 find mentioned in the said appointment letter reveals that the order will take effect from 1-8-2014 and the petitioner was directed to take over the charge on 1-8-2014, however the record reveals that she made her arrival report on 5-7-2014, much prior to the date mentioned in condition laid down in her appointment letter. Later on her appointment order was withdrawn vide letter No,347-53 dated 10-7-2014 and respondent No,4, namely Mst. Lubna Bibi daughter of Said Karam resident of Koz Palaw Manyar, District Swat, who has secured 75.41 marks being meritorious to the petitioner and Mst. Rukhsana having secured 65.84 marks was substituted and posted at GGHS Kalam, vide the same order. One Saima daughter of Din Muhammad, respondent No,5, who secured 82.77 marks and stood topper at GGMS Shinkad and GGHS Kalam was also appointed. It is pertinent to mention that in GGHS Kalam, respondent, Mst. Saima has been shown at Serial No, 3 as candidates shown at Serial Nos.1 and 2 were admittedly disqualified and she stood topper, whereas in merit list of GGMS Shinkad, she has been shown at Serial No,4, however, became topper due to the appointment of candidates shown at Serial Nos.2 and 3 in other schools, whereas the candidate placed at Serial No,1 has not joined the service. Admittedly, respondent, Mst. Saima had undertaken and has been given choices/ priorities regarding GGHS/GGMS Manj a, GGHS/GGMS Sarsinai and GGHS/GGMS Shinkad only and there was no choice on her behalf in respect of GGHS Kalam.
4, The Notification dated 30-4-2014, issued by the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa reveals that in supersession of all the Notifications issued in this behalf by the competent authority, laid down the selection criteria and other conditions specified and applicable to all the posts to be filled on ad hoc school base, regarding which method of recruitment, qualification has already been circulated. It is also find mentioned in the said Notification that obtaining 50% marks in the NTS test is removed. The candidates who have applied for more than one school and stood first position in one school his appointment will be made in that school. In case a candidates stood first positions in more than one school, his appointment will be made in a school where a chance of appointment to other highest scorer be given. In the instant matter, as observed above that Mst. Saima, respondent, secured top position in both the schools i,e, GGHS Kalam and GGMS Shinkad, as she has not opted for Kalam, therefore she has been appointed in Shinkad, leaving room for Mst. Lubna Bibi, respondent to be posted at GGHS Kalam, as in the absence of Mst. Saima, she became meritorious to be appointed as such. Though the appointment of Mst. Saima was made vide letter No,14373-80 dated 30-6-2014 at GGHS Kalam but to that effect no choice/priority was given by her, though she take over the charge at Kalam, but it would not deprive her of the right to be posted in the school of her choice and, as such, she has rightly been posted at GGMS Shinkad. The petitioner could not point out any infirmity or illegality in the orders impugned herein, as she remained at lower pedestal in merit as against both the respondents and she had no authority to make arrival on 5-7-2014, prior to cut date i,e, 1-8-2014, however, she submitted charge report in violation of the terms and conditions mentioned in her appointment order dated 30-6-2014, vide which she was appointed, the said order was not based on merit and, as such, she has no "locus standi" to question the merits of the respondents resulting into their appointment.
5. Before parting with judgment, we have observed that order of 30-6-2014 was issued by District Education Officer (Female), Swat at Saidu Sharif, ignoring Mst Saima, respondent No,5, which is depricative. The officer tried to cover her negligence in subsequent office order of 10-7-2014, wherein it is observed that petitioner was appointed inadvertently due to human error, despite the fact that another candidate namely Mst. Lubna Bibi being higher in merit to petitioner was not considered. The remarks seems odd to us, probably meant to explain her position. It is astonishing to note that order dated 30-6-2014 was issued on the recommendation of Departmental Selection Committee, which is highly deplorable and tantamount to derange the system. The offers shall be seriously dealt with due to their irresponsible attitude towards performance of duties, entrusted to them. They are instrumental to the litigation between the parties and caused vulnerability for them.
6. Director Education, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is directed to probe into the matter and delinquent officers shall be taken to task in order to eliminate deprivation and necessary entries with red ink be made in their dossier, to set an example. He is also directed to inquire into alike matter throughout the province and warn the delinquent officers of the Department. The Additional Registrar of this Court be apprised accordingly.
' For the aforementioned reasons, the instant petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed.