MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.----The petitioner was serving as continge nt paid staff as (JMT) at City Hospital Gilgit since 2016. The respondents advertized the post of Aya (BS-1) in daily K-2 dated 23.06.2018 and after going through the process of test/interview , respondent No. 4 on the recommendations of Departmen tal Selection Committee issued a merit list the candidates who were recommended for appointment vide office order No. 102/CHG/Estb/2018 dated 08.08.2018 and another Notification No. 110/CHG/Estb/2016 was issued, whereby the name of the petitioner was dropped and instead name of respondent No. 6 was substituted.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the act of the respondent s Nos. 1 to 4 is sheer abuse of their authority and a classical example of undue favour and nepotism. The petitioner being a contingent paid staff was having a preferential right over the respondent No. 1, which right has been denied to him without any legal justification and the act of respondents Nos. 1 to 4 be declared illegal/unwarranted and they be directed to appoint the petitioner .
3. The learned Assistant Advocate General opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner was rightly dropped from the final list dated 12.11.2018, as she was domiciled from Hunza and the posts were meant for the local residents of the respective Union Council. Per A.A.G. the contingent paid staff has no preferential right over the other competitors.
4. We are sorry to observe that the contentions raised at bar are not sustainable in the eyes of law. The petitioner was serving as JMT (on contingent basis) in City hospital Gilgit since 2016. The arguments of the learned Assistant Advocate General are in negation of Gilgit Baltistan Services and General Administration and Cabinet Department letter dated 16.11.2018, whereby it finds mentioned that for appointment from BPS-01 to BPS-05, there shall be no screening test and no contingent paid staff shall be removed on the basis of non availability of the post. The contention that the petitioner belongs to District Hunza and the post of Aya was a Union Council specific is also rebutted from the record, A provided by the petitioner along with the writ petition, whereby the CNIC bearing Nos.
71501-1286749-1 dated 30.06.2018 and her domicile certificate No. Misc.(1)/1096/2017 dated 20.07.2018, issued by Sub-Divisional Magistrate Danyore contains the permanent address of the petitioner as under:- "Chakas Kot, P.O. Khas Danyore, Tehsil and District Gilgit."
5. The petitioner was shown at serial No. 6 of the list issued by respondents on 08.08.2018 but the name of the petitioner was dropped, when a fresh list dated 12.11.2018 was issued, which was highly unjust, improper and without any legal justification.
6. In view of above discussions the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to issue appointment order of the petitioner in the light of office order dated 08.08.2018, within a period of 01 month and submit the compliance report to the Registrar of this Court for our perusal. The Notification No. 110/CHG/Estb/2016 dated 12.11.2018, whereby the appointment of Mst. Bibi Hawa at serial No 17 of the above notification was ordered is declared illegal, unwarranted, without lawful authority and of no legal ef fect.
7. We depreciate the unwarranted and non transparent selection of the candidate by the respondents, which has forced the petitioner to approach this Court for redressal of her genuine grievance. The respondents, who are sitting at the helm of the affairs, must note that they are accountable for their deeds before this Court and then before Allah Almighty on the day of judgment. It would have been appropriate to issue show-cause notices to the members of Selection Committee and Medical Superintendent for extending undue favour to respondent No. 6. We leave the matter to be taken up by the Chief Secretary , who shall constitute an inquiry committee to probe into the facts and take stern action against the delinquent of ficials.
7. Writ allowed.