RAJA SHAKEEL AHMAD, J. The facts rose to file the instant petition are that the petitioner are residents of Village Siliharang Yasin, District Ghizer, wherein a project of Hydel power is constructed on the land of petitioner, although, a nominal compensation for the land is given to the petitioner which is acquired for construction of building and water tank, but as the pin stock pipe and water exit course of the project passes through the remaining lands of the petitioner, as a result, the remaining lands and houses of the petitioners are under continuous threat of damages. During construction of the project the petitioners showed concern of danger and threat of outburst of the penstock pipe and damage of their lands as well as threat of their life, and resisted the construction work. Being convinced and accepting the concern of the petitioners the respondents officially make commitments with petitioners to compensate them for their remaining lands form where the pin stock pipe of the project is installed. The respondents through written orders made commitment with the petitioners to appoint them against the posts of Grades I and II being affectees, land donors and being under threat of outburst of the Pin Stock Pipe which damaged their lands and houses, but during appointments of staff the respondents violated their commitment and didn't considered the petitioners for appointment, hence this writ petition. The Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 are authorities of Government of Gilgit Baltistan and Water and Power Department GB, while respondents Nos. 6 to 15 are the private individuals, who were appointed by the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 instead of the petitioners. The prayer part of the memo, of petition is reproduced as under: - "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that:-
(a) The respondents may kindly be directed to appoint the petitioners on the said project of Grade-I to II and the appointment orders dated 29/10/2021 of respondents Nos. 6 to 15 may kindly be cancelled to meet the ends of justice, law and equity.
(b) Any other relief this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to meet the ends of justice, law and equity."
2. Copy of the petition provided to the respondents for filing pars-wise comments, but the respondents failed to furnish the same. Arguments heard.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that a power project of construction of 1 MW Hydro Power Project was approved by the Provincial Government at Siliharang which was constructed on the land of petitioners, although a nominal compensation of the acquired land is given by the respondents 1 to 5, but after installation of the project the due to outburst of the pin stock pipe the houses of the petitioners have been damaged and till today remaining land is under direct grab of the project due to constant leakage and outburst of the pins tock pipe which passes over the houses and lands of the petitioners. The petitioners being local inhabitants of the village and aggrieved affectees of the project, protested against the damages constantly occurred after objected the project on their lands with the pretext that they are poor and low income people and cannot effort the wastage of land due to construction of power project, during their protest the respondents in process of negotiation demanded written resolution, and in this regard the petitioners passed a resolution. The respondents presented the said resolution before the competent authority and after due deliberation the respondents issued the office order dated 26/05/2014, wherein the respondents have categorically accepted the rights of the petitioners, stating that during appointment permanently are temporarily, the petitioners shall be given preference against the post of Grade-1 and Grade-11 in respect of the said project. The respondents have also admitted the fact that the residential houses and land of the petitioners are badly effected while construction of the said power project. The lands of petitioners were acquired by the respondents at low cost with the plea that the petitioners will be compensated by means of employment when the project completed and also assured the preference. The learned counsel further contended that most of the petitioners are working with respondents voluntarily with the hope that they will be appointed against the regular posts when the same will be created, but the respondents failed to consider their day and night services, appointed respondents Nos. 6 to 15, who are residents of far flung areas. When the respondents advertised the post of Grades I and II and Turbine Operator for the said power project, the petitioners submitted an application in the light of office order dated 26/05/2014. The petitioners were assured verbally that they will be preferred during the process of appointment, as such the petitioner appeared before the selection committee due to commitment of respondents Nos.1 to 5. The respondents after conducting interview and appointed the respondents Nos. 6 to 15 by violating all rules and law and also against the letter No. EE-W.P/Casher/2013-14/704 dated 26/05/2014. The respondents have violated the principle for appointment of Grades I and II by appointing the respondents beyond the local limits of the Siliharang, who are residents of other areas distancing 6 to 7 kilometer away from the place of duty of the Hydro Power Project. As per principle for appointment of Grade-I and II no interview is required, but the respondents just to pay undue favour to their blue eyed, called for interview and appointed the private respondents, however, the petitioners are well qualified for the impugned posts. The petitioners approached to the respondents, but all in vain, hence no any other forum to seek remedy except to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. At the end the learned counsel for petitioners prayed for the remedy, which is mentioned in the memo of petition and reproduced supra.
4. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Advocate General robustly opposed the contention of learned counsel for petitioners and contended that no fundamental right of petitioners has been infringed because of appointment of respondents Nos.6 to 15. It is not a law that an officer of any department assure to a person through letter for appointment against the regular post.
Government can take the land of any land owner, subject to 15% compulsory acquisition charges for construction of any development scheme. The respondents 6 to 15 have qualified the interview being experienced to be appointed against the regular posts. The writ petition of the petitioners is baseless and is liable to be dismissed, as such may be dismissed please.
5. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties pro and contra and perused the record of the case.
6. Perusal of available record it transpires that 1 MW, Hydro Power Project was approved by the Provincial Government at Siliharang Village Tehsil Yasin, which was constructed on the land of petitioners. It is also evident from the record that after installation of the machinery and pipe, due to the outburst of the pin stock pipe the houses of the petitioners have been damaged and the petitioner vide their resolution/complaint dated 02/03/2014 demanded the compensation from the respondents. (copy of the same is available on case file) It is also available on case file that the respondent ratified the damages occurred to the houses of petitioners during implementation of project and it has also been admitted by the respondents that due to leakage in the channel of power house the cops and trees of the petitioner have been lost. We found the letter issued from the office to executive engineer Water and Power Division Ghizer dated 26th November 2014 along with a list of land donors and damages of Houses at 01 MW Siliharang Yasin Ghizer wherein the names of the petitioners are reflected and in the same letter it is rectified that a resolution has been submitted by the affectees that upon approval of the PC-IV priority for jobs may be given to them. It is also recommended in the said letter that as per policy for appointment against the 2% provision of development projects, land donors/effected people and local inhabitants may be given priority on regular footing. We also found the orders issued to the petitioners by the respondents against the 2% development project, when the petitioners resisted the initiation of projects on their lands. It Is also on the record that alter issuance of the letter dated 26th November 2014 the petitioners served the respondents on volunteer basis for a long period spread over more than Five Years, and the respondents in recognition of their volunteer services issued certificates of appreciation to the petitioner wherein they admitted that the petitioner are obedient and hard workers and rendering volunteer services.
7. We also found a list of volunteer staff E&M Sub-Division Yasin since 2015 to up to date issued by the respondent, wherein, the names of the petitioner are also reflected. It is also admitted fact of affairs that after installation of machinery and pipe of the project, due to outburst of the pin stock pipe the houses of the petitioners have been damaged and till today remaining land is under direct grab of the project due to constant leakage and outburst of the pins tock pipe which passes over the houses and remaining lands of the petitioners.
8. It is also admitted state of affairs that, the petitioners who are poor souls and only bread earners of their family, the respondents acquired their lands forcefully and against their will, at a very low cost by giving them a nominal compensation and made commitment of providing employment which created a legitimate expectation that they will be compensated by means of employment when the project shall be completed and PC-IV approved.
9. It is also evident from the record that on the basis of that legitimate expectation conveyed by the respondents (Authority), to the petitioners (beneficiaries) for their future security i.e. provision of employment as Grades 1 and 2 in the power project, the petitioners are working with respondents voluntarily with the hope that they will be appointed against the regular posts when the same will be created.
10. It is also admitted fact that the petitioner keeps the eligibility (Physical and Academic) required for the post of Grades I and II and belong to the same vicinity where the power project is constructed, but the respondents failed to consider their day and night services, appointed respondents Nos. 6 to 15, who are residents of far flung areas.
11. It is also available on case file that when the respondents advertised the post of Grades I and II and Turbine Operator for the said power project, the petitioners submitted an application in the light of office order dated 26/05/2014. The petitioners were assured that they will be preferred during the process of appointment, as such the petitioner appeared before the selection committee due to commitment of respondents Nos.1 to 5. The respondents after conducting interview instead of appointing the petitioners have appointed the respondents Nos. 6 to 15 by violating all rules and law and also against the letter No. EE-W.P/Casher/2013-14/704 dated 26/05/2014. The, the action of the respondents is also against the policy and decision of Cabinet Wherein it is held that the land donors shall be given priority in appointments for the post of Grades I and II such the respondents have violated the policy for appointment of Grades I and II by appointing the respondents beyond the local limits of the Siliharang, who are residents of other areas distancing 6 to 7 kilometer away from the place of duty of the Hydro Power Project.
12. The doctrine of the legitimate expectation has its genesis in the field of administrative law. The Government and its departments, in administrating the affairs of the country, are expected to honor their statements of policy or intention and treat the citizens with full personal consideration, without any iota of abuse of discretion. The policy statements could not be disregarded unfairly or applied selectively, which is akin to violation of natural justice. It was in this context that the doctrine of legitimate expectation is procedural right. But claims based on legitimate expectation have been held to require reliance on representations and resulting detriment to the claimant in the same way as claims based on promissory estoppel which is admittedly occurred in this case in hand.
13. In the circumstances discussed above the respondents were bound to appoint the petitioners on the vacant post but they failed to abide the policy and their commitment. As a result of and in the light of forgoing discussion the writ petition to extent of appointment of the petitioners on the post of Grades I and II is allowed, and to the extent of termination of Respondents 6 to 15 is disallowed.
14. The respondents are directed to appoint the petitioners on the available posts of Grade 1 and 2 in water and power department in Sub Division Yasin, in case of unavailability of post the respondents shall appoint the petitioners on contingent basis and their contingency shall be continued till the availability of post of Grades 1 and 2 in the department of water and power division sub-division Yasin. Accordingly, this Writ Petition No. 422/2021 along with C. Misc. No. 755/2021 is disposed of accordingly. File.