SAHIBZADA ASADULLAH, J. Through this single judgment, we intend to decide this and connected writ petition No. 113-D/2019 as both these writ petitions involve the same question of law. For the purposes of passing the judgment, the instant writ petition is being taken into consideration.
2. By virtue of these petitions filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, it is averred that the petitioners being married women, had applied against the posts of Primary School Teacher (PST), for which, inter alia, the eligibility criteria is that the candidate must be the permane nt resident of the Union Council, where the school in which the vacant post is to be filled is located.
3. On direction of Court order , the comments of respondents were called for which were submitted accordingly , wherein merit position of petitioners were not denied, nevertheless it was urged that during scrutiny of petitioners' documents it had come to notice that as per the CNIC, petitioners belonged to other Union Councils, therefore, their names were not considered for their appointment of respective Union Councils, where they had applied.
4. Arguments heard and record perused.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it reveals that merit position of petitioners is not denied by respondent/department. Nevertheless, their names were excluded from merit list for the sole reason that according to their CNICs the petitioners were not permanent resident of their respective Union Councils which they had applied, despi te the fact, that they had provided domicile certificates, showing their permanent abode at their respective Union Councils. So much so the petitioner s have changed the permanent address in their CNICs prior to filing the writ petitions.
6. No doubt, section 3 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Appointment, Deputation, Posting and Transfer of Teachers, Lecturers, Instructors and Doctors) Regulatory Act, 2011, regulate the appointment, posting and transfer of Primary School Teacher , according to which a vacancy of Primary School Teacher (PST) shall be filled in from candidate belonging to the U.C of their permanent residence mentioned in their Computer ized National Identity Card and Domicile on merit and if no eligible candidate in that U.c is available, where the school is situated, such appointment shall be made on merit from amongst eligible candidate belonging to the adjacent U.C, but in the case in hand, admittedly , as per CNIC permanent address, the petitioners have shifted to Union Council Bilot Sharif and Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan as they got marriage to Muhammad Ismail Hani and Muhammad Ramzan who are not resident of Union Council Kathgarh and Dhap Shumali, Paharpur , D.I.Khan. The petitioners have abandoned their abode from the place mentioned in the CNICs of petitioners and shifted to the U.C, where they have applied for appointment against the post of PST on U.C basis. It is also an undeniable fact that petitioners are permanent and definite residents of the place mentioned in their CNIC as Union Council Bilot and Union Council Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan and they ought to have applied to the posts of PST in their respective Union Councils but they did not.
7. From the above, it is manifest that two essential condition, would confer indefeasible right on person viz he/she must dwell permanently in particular area and enjoy the benefits specifically allocated to inhabitants of that area.
The CNIC always indicates two different places of dwelling of a person i.e. permanent address and temporary dwelling place while term domicile denotes a fix permanent residence of a person. However , the issue in hand is not the acquisition of domicile of a particular place by a person in Pakistan but relates to the discretion of the appointing authority to determine the place of permanent resident of a person/candidate, who is applying against a post, as one of the essential criteria. The permanent place of residence of a person has a very wide connotation.
For example, a person might have been born in one place, however , it is his fundamental right to make any other place as the place of his permanent reside nce. This right has also been provided to him under the clear mandate of Article 15 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 which reads as under:-
15. Every citizen shall have the right to remain in, and, subject to any reasonable restriction imposed by law in the public interest enter and move freely throughout Pakistan and to reside and settle in any part thereof.
8. Likewise, the issuance of domicile certificate is governed by Section 17 of the Pakistan Citizenship Act, 1951 ("Act") and Rule 23 of the Pakistan Citize nship Rules 1952 ("Rules") the provisions are reproduced here for ready reference:- "Section -17. Certificate of Domicile.- The Federal Government may upon an application being made to it in the prescribed manner containing the prescribed particulars grant a certificate of domicile to any person in respect of whom it is satisfied that he has ordinarily resided in Pakistan for a period of not less than one year immediately before the making of the application and has acquired a domicile therein".
"Rule -23. Certificate of domicile.- The Federal Government, the Provincial Government or any District Magistrate authorized by the Provincial Government in this behalf may on application made to it in this behalf issue a certificate of domicile in Form 'P-1' in the manner following: --
(a) An application for a certificate of domicile shall be made in Form "P" in duplica te, shall be accompanied by an affidavit affirming the truth of the statement made in it and affirming further that the applicant had not migrated to India after the first day of March, 1947 or that, having so migrated, and returned to Pakistan under a permit for resettlement or permanent return issued by an of ficer authorized by the Government of Pakistan.
(b) Any authority to whom an application is presented may demand such evidence as it may consider necessary for satisfying itself that the facts stated in the application are correct and that the applicant has been continually resident in Pakistan for a period not less than one year and intends to live permanently in Pakistan.
(c) The authority shall pass such orders on the application as it deems fit."
9. The word 'Domicile' is not defined in the Act or Rules. In Black's Law Dictionary (Eighth Addition) it is defined as "The place at which a person has been physically present and that the person regards as home; a person's true fixed, principal and permanent home, to which that person intends to return and remain even though currently residing elsewhere. A person has a settled connection with his or her domicile for legal purposes, either because that place is home or because law has so designated that place." The Concise Oxford English Dictionary (Eleventh Edition, Revised) defines 'permanent' as "lasting or remaining unchanged indefinitely , or intended to be so; not temporary"
10. In both these cases, the issue relating to the place of permanent residence of the married women is involved. In this regard, we could not find any instrum ent governing the issue, however , on the analogy of Sections 15 & 16 of the Succession Act, 1925, it appears that a married woman normally follows the domicile of her husband during subsistence of the marriage. The issue in context of a married woman for a government post has thoroughly been elaborated in the case of Dr. Mrs. Munawar Zaheen vs. The Secretary Punjab Public Service Commission, Lahore and 02 others' ( PLD 1974 Lahore 36 ) wherein by holding that:- "9. The Law Department's advice dated 22.02.72 appears to be the correct analysis of the decision of the Government on this subject. It is also otherwise reasonable and just. It imparts certainty on the question of domicile of a female Government servant by obviating the necessity of frequent changes in it, during continuance of her service and avoids absurdities which can arise by following the view of the Law Adviser . It is not denied that an unmarried female candidate belonging to a particular Zone will not lose her post if she gets married to a person of another Zone, after selection. The result of this view would be that a woman who is eligible for a post from a particular Zone before marriage and can continue to hold the post reserved for said Zone, despite marrying a person belonging to another Zone, but she will however be ineligible for the said post, if she got married to the said person just before the Interview . The decision of the Services Department dated 14.01.72 was doubtless designed to correct such an absurd position. But the said decision must be read subject to the earlier decision made on 03.8.1962.
11. The intention of the married woman to make the ordinary or permanent place of residence of her husband can also be gathered if she has acquired a CNIC or domicile wherein her permanent residence is reflect as that of a husband.
12. Thus, in view of above, we have reached at the conclusion that before entering into service, the permanent place of residence of a married woman would be deemed to be that of her husband and entry in this regard in the CNIC would be an evidence of her perma nent place of the residence irrespective of the fact that the said document
(CNIC) has been acquired after publication of the advertisement for the post.
13. In the present writ petitions, the petitioners claim that they are the bonafide resident of Union Council Kathgarh and Union Council Dhap Shumali, Tehsil Paharpur , D.I.Khan and have thus applie d for the post of PST in various schools which were located in the territorial limits of the said Union Councils but their permanent residence indicated in CNIC in different Union Councils i.e U.C Bilot and UC Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan, thus, they were not considered for appointment in the said Union Councils.
14. The permanent place of residence of the petitioners, according to their CNIC, are Union Council Bilot and Union Council Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan, however , before interview they were married to Muhammad Ismail Hani and Muhammad Ramzan (husband) who are the permanent residents of Union Council Kathgarh and Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan. They were issued fresh CNICs wherein their permanent place of residence are mentioned as Union Council Bilot and Union Council Mandhra Kalan, D.I.Khan, therefore, they were rightly not considered for appointment on the posts which were meant for those candidates holding CNICs and domicile of Union Council Kathgarh and Union Council Mandhra Kalana, D.I.Khan.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to make out a case for interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction.
For the reason stated above, this and connected writ petition No. 1 13-D/2019 being bereft of merits are dismissed.