' NOOR-UL-HAQ N. QURESHI, J.--- All these writ petitions involving common questions of law and facts are being decided through this single order.
2. Brief facts of the cases are that in response to invitation made by respondent No,1 through newspaper "The News" dated 12.10.2012 for professional training for eleven months in different disciplines, the petitioners submitted applications, their tests were held and on declaring them as successful candidates their names were shortlisted and they were interviewed. After completion of almost entire process, cases of the petitioners were forwarded to the competent authority for approval but before grant of approval, the Prime Minister of Pakistan imposed ban upon all sort of recruitments, hence, the process of selection of petitioners could not be completed. Respondent No,2 on the basis of acute shortage of technical professionals, flouted a summary for fresh recruitment by mentioning that the trainees shall be offered jobs in the company at the end of their training, depending on the outcome of their training/merit and availability of vacancies. The Prime Minister of Pakistan accorded permission for recruitment against 100% posts vacant in OGDCL. On grant of approval, respondents Nos.1 and 2 invited fresh applications depriving the trainees of their rights as all process of their appointments was completed before imposition of ban. Hence, the above writ petitions.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that acts of respondents regarding stoppage of recruitment of trainees is based on mala 'tide and in violation of their past practice simply to accommodate their favorites and to deprive the petitioners of their lawful rights; that the petitioners are qualified and eligible candidates to be recruited on the posts advertised by respondent No,1 in "Daily The News" dated 12.10.2012; that in similar situations 'Hon'ble Peshawar High Court, Peshawar has also protected the rights of affectees. That the petitioners have no other efficacious remedy except to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court by filing these writ petitions.
4. Learned counsel for respondents has argued that the petitioners have got no legal or fundamental right which has been infringed and they have no cause of action and locus-standi to file the present writ petitions; that the respondents have not denied right of the petitioners to apply afresh against the advertised posts. Hence, instant writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.
5. Arguments heard, record perused.
6. Main crux of the case as apparent from the controversy raised by both the parties is that after advertising posts conducting written test and interviews, ban was imposed by the Government.
The management of OGDCL through letter requested the Prime Minster for lifting ban as they were facing acute shortage of staff, In this respect, summary was also flouted. The recommendation was made for fresh recruitment in SSGCL, SNGPL, Inter State Gas System Limited and Hydrocarbon Development Institute of Pakistan. Surprisingly, no reason was assigned for fresh appointment in OGDCL when earlier by incurring huge amount of exchequer more than 40,000 candidates were put to written test. On short listing the petitioners were called for interview and their names were recommended for appointment when ban was imposed. On query raised by the Court, neither any reason for imposing ban nor initiation of process for fresh recruitment has been assigned by the respondents. The persons who participated in recruitment process have also spend huge amount, undertook journey, made preparation and appeared in written test as well as interviews.
7. Of course, the appointment letters had yet not issued therefore, no right accrued in favour of the petitioners, but under such circumstances, when no reason has been assigned and process of recruitment was at final stage as only appointment letters were required to be issued on recommendation of the Committee, initiation of process for fresh recruitment is illegal which act of the respondents remained shrouded in mystery when earlier process of recruitment was entirely completed.
8. In view of above, I am of the opinion that the petitioners have made out a strong case. Therefore, all these writ petitions are accepted and the respondents are directed to initiate process of recruitment from the stage where they left it on imposing ban and then finally announce the result of successful candidates. This exercise is being done to save the precious time and money of concerned department.