MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.--- This is a review petition against order dated 09-09-2016, passed by this Court in W.P. No,92/2016 whereby, this Court has allowed the writ petition and passed the following order:- <i>"We in the circumstance have no other option except to allow the instant writ petition upto the extent of Abdul Jabbar/ petitioner No,1 and Akhtar. Munir/petitioner No,2 however, the writ petition of Muhammad Hashim/petitioner No,3 has already been dismissed due to lack of qualification vide order/judgment dated 08-09-2016. The instant petition is accordingly disposed of. File. <i><u>Announced:- </u> 09-09-2016 Sd/- Chief Judge Sd/ Judge</i> 2.Petitioners of W.P. No,92/2016 prayed for orders to the effect that petitioners of said petition are residents of mouza Zian, Tehsil Shonter of district Astore, therefore, are eligible to be considered for their appointment against some suit posts of the said petition. It is not disputed that mouza Zian is part of Union Council Minimarg Astore. Petitioners of this petition are admittedly residents of Union Council Minimarg. Feeling aggrieved from the order dated 09-09-2016, passed by a D.B. of this Court in W.P. No,92/2016, petitioners have filed this petition.
3.We have heard learned counsel for parties at length and have gone through the material available on file. Petitioners are admittedly residents of Minimarg Astore and appeared in the test and interview for their appointment against the suit posts of W.P. No,92/2016. Petitioners have admittedly been shown in the short list prepared by respondents in connection with proceedings of appointment of eligible candidates for the suit posts of subject matter of W.P. No,92/2016. <u>So, the question for determination is, whether Zian is separate from Union Council Minimarg or is part of the same? </u> 4.Once it is admitted that petitioners are residents of Union Council Minimarg. We deem it appropriate to decide the question, whether Zian is part of the same or not? Or what will be the consequences if mouza Zian is part of Union Council Minimurg? Therefore, in our opinion, petitioners are important party to W.P. No,92/2016 and deserve to be impleaded to the said petition.
5. We have heard learned counsel for parties on the aspect of accepting this review petition or converting this petition into a petition under Section 12(2), C.P.C. Obviously, petitioners of W.P.
No,92/2016 have obtained an order in their favour in connection with proceedings of the said petition, therefore, we will have to convert this petition into a petition under section 12(2), C.P.C. So, we convert this petition into a petition under Section 12(2), C.P.C., allow the same and pass the following order:- "Order dated 09-09-2016 passed by a D.B. of this Court in W.P. No,92/2016 stands set aside. We direct office for impleading petitioners of this petition to the W.P. No,92/2016 as respondents Nos,5 to 12 and then W.P. No,92/2016 be presented before the D.B. for onward proceedings. This file be consigned to record."