1. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner appeared in walk-in-interview for his appointment in public service before the Superintending Engineer , Provincial Buildings Larkana, despite announcement of no result, some bogus appointments are being made, therefore, the respondents be directed to announce the result and appoint the petitioner , if his name appears in merit list.
2. Learned Addl.A.G for the State by making reference to comments filed by the Superintending Engineer , Provincial Buildings Larkana, has sought for dismissal of the instant constitutional petition by contending that the petitioner has never appeared in requisite interview . It is denied by the petitioner by filing his rejoinder .
3. We have considered the above arguments and perused record.
4. The petitioner could hardly insist upon for issuance of the merit list of the successful candidates, the process has never been participated by him, allegedly . Even otherwise, the controversy with regard to appearance of the petitioner for his interview or otherwise before the Superintending Engineer , Provincial Buildings Larkana, being factual could not be resolved by this Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction. Consequently , the instant constitutional petition being misconceived is dismissed accordingly .