1. ' Through the above titled writ petition filed under. Section 44 of the AJ&K Interim Constitution Act, 1974, a direction has been sought against the official non-petitioners to appoint the petitioner in the light of recommendations of Selection Board against the advertised posts of Lecturers Mathematics BPS-17 and BPS-18 withheld/occupied by non-Petitioner No, 6 or to appoint the petitioner as such against the post vacated by Sana Siddique.
2. ' Facts shortly stated are that petitioner applied for job against the posts of Lecturer Mathematics BPS-18 and Junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17 advertised5y the official non-petitioners vide advertisement dated 18.12.2013. Petitioner participated in test/ interview and qualified the same against both the advertised posts of Lecturers Mathematics BPS-17 and BPS-18. As per his claim, petitioner was recommended by the Selection Board for appointment against both the disciplines being at Serial No, 07 of the merit list for the post of Lecturer Mathematics BPS-18 as well as being at Serial No, 08 of the merit list against the post of Junior Lecturer BPS-17. The stance of the petitioner is that after qualifying the test and interview, he was recommended by the selection board for appointment against the posts in question but for unknown reasons the official non-petitioners are not going to appoint the petitioner. Petitioner also claims his appointment against the post withheld/occupied by non-Petitioner No, 6 on contract/ temporary basis as well as against the post vacated by Sana Siddique, Junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17. Petitioner has been striving for his appointment but the official non-petitioners with mala-fide intention are not going to appoint the petitioner, hence, the instant writ petition.
3. ' I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Legal Advisor appearing to behalf of the non-petitioners. It has been argued on behalf of the non-petitioner that petitioner claims appointment against a post vacated by one Sana Siddique Junior Lecturer BPS-17, but has not impleaded her in the line of non- petitioners. In his view, the writ petition is liable to dismissal for non-impleadment of a necessary party. It would suffice to say in this regard that petitioner has no grievance against Mst. Sana Siddique; rather, it has been claimed by the petitioner that the post vacated by her is still available for regular appointment. In such a situation, Sana Siddique was not a necessary party to be impleaded as non-petitioner.
4. ' It has been claimed on behalf of the non-petitioners that writ petition suffers from laches because the petitioner has challenged the process of selection after a period of around 07 months. A perusal of record shows that as many as 05 candidates were notified for appointment as Lecturers in Mathematics in Mirpur University of Sciences and Technology (MUST) vide notification dated 30.01.2015. The petitioner applied to Vice Chancellor of the University for his appointment vide application dated 09.03.2015. It transpires that the petitioner was not delivered the certified copies, applied for, and his application for regular appointment remained unanswered. The petitioner has provided certified copies of these documents during arguments which lead to the impression that he has been continuously striving for obtaining order of his appointment and for issuance of certified copies of the relevant documents. In such a situation, doctrine of laches does not debar the petitioner to file a writ petition.
5. ' The petitioner, in consequence of advertisement dated 18.12.2013, applied for positions of Lecturer BPS-18 and Junior Lecturer BPS-17 in Mathematics, whereupon he was called for interview for both the cadres vide letters dated 28.08.2014. A perusal of certified copy of minutes of Selection Board shows that as many as 35 candidates applied for junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17 out of whom'
6. 30 candidates turned up before the selection board and were interviewed. The selection board recommended 09 candidates for appointment as Junior Lecturers BPS-17 in the subject of Mathematics, including the petitioner who falls at Serial No, 08 of the merit list prepared by the selection board. On recommendations of the selection board, Senate of the University, in its 7th meeting held on 25.12.2014, has appointed 05 candidates as Lecturers BPS-17. A perusal of notification of appointment shows that no reason has been assigned for dropping rest of the 04 candidates approved by the selection board. It may be mentioned here that the official non- petitioners have not attached any document with the written statement, indicating number of vacancies of Junior Lecturers BPS-17 or Lecturers BPS-18 available in the university. It is further noticed that management of the University did not even mention number of posts in the advertisement available for regular recruitment or recruitment on contract basis. The petitioner has attached with the writ petition a detail of pay and allowances for the financial year 201415, which states that one Sana Siddique Junior Lecturer BPS-17 has been working in the University on permanent basis. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that said .Sana Siddique had left the department prior to appointments of the candidates selected in pursuance of advertisement dated 18.12.2013. The petitioner has categorically mentioned in paragraph 03 of the memorandum of the writ petition that alongwith advertised posts of lecturers, 02 other posts were also available at the time of advertisement and are still available, as against the post of Lecturer.
7. Mathematics BPS-18 a contract employee Muhammad Rehman is performing his duties whereas against the post of Junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17 one Sana Siddique was performing her duties who has vacated the said post before advertisement dated 18.12.2013. The non-petitioners in their written statement have not categorically denied that Sana Siddique has quit the department before the advertisement dated 18.12.2013; rather written statement on this point is silent. It was the responsibility of the official non-petitioners to bring on record all the relevant facts but the non- petitioners have concealed this fact by not bringing on record the relevant documents on relinquishment of the post by Sana Siddique. It may also be remarked here that non-mentioning of number of the posts in the advertisement is also an action which cannot be treated as bona-fide on part of University Management. As a principle of law, number of posts have to be mentioned in the advertisement against whom the regular appointments are required. As mentioned earlier, the official non-petitioners have concealed the fact that Sana Siddique had quit the job of Lecturer Mathematics, so, claim of the petitioner in this regard would be deemed as admitted under the provisions of Order VIII Rule 5, CPC. It may further be stated that petitioner has attached an affidavit in support of the afore-cited fact which has not been rebutted by the non-petitioners through a counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner has correctly relied on 2015 SCR 123 wherein it has been laid down that when affidavit is filed in support of contentions of the writ petition to prove a fact and the affidavit is not controverted, then said fact is deemed to have been admitted as correct Learned counsel has further relied on 1999 SCR 287 and 1999 SCR 129 by contending that Selection Board had recommended him for appointment as Junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17, so, a right had accrued to him which cannot be taken away without any cogent reason.
8. ' Nutshell of the above discussion is that the writ petition is accepted and the official non- petitioners are directed to appoint the petitioner as Junior Lecturer Mathematics BPS-17 in the University in pursuance of advertisement dated 18.12.2013. In the circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to further direct that in future, management of the University shall not advertise vacant posts without mentioning number of the jobs. No order as to the costs.