ALI BAIG, CJ. This application has been filed by the petitioners under Order XXXIX, Rule 4 read with section 151, C.P.C. for vacation of status quo which was passed by this Court in W.P. No.743/2022, vide order dated 06.01.2023, whereby this Court had directed the parties to maintain status quo to the extent of 23 impugned posts of Principal/Vice Principal/Headmaster (BPS-19) which were sent to FPSC for direct induction/appointment by the present respondent Set-II through advertisement dated 3rd June, 2020.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case gathered from the available record are that on requisition of Education Department GB under the Recruitment Rules, 2014, the FPSC authorities had advertised 16 posts of Principal/Vice Principal/ Headmaster (BPS-19), vide Advertisement No.04/2020,, Case No. F.4-83/2020-R (4/2020) dated 3rd June, 2020. Accordingly, the FPSC had commenced/ started the process of recruitment of the aforesaid posts. After completion of recruitment process by the FPSC, the present respondents Set-11 had filed a Writ Petition Bearing No.743/2022 titled "Abdul Jabbar and others v. Provincial Government and others" before this Court, wherein this Court had directed the parties of above mentioned writ petition to maintain status quo to the extent of 23 posts of Principal/Vice Principal/ Headmaster (BPS-19), vide order dated 06.01.2023 passed in W.P.
No.743/2022.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid status quo order dated 06.01.2023 passed by this Court, the present petitioners have filed the instant petition for vacation of status quo before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioners have appeared in written test and interview for the above impugned posts and they are waiting for final result which is expected to be announced in near future/soon by the FPSC, but the present respondent Set No.1 have misrepresented the facts before the Court in W.P No. 743/2022 and this Court has issued the impugned status quo order, which is contrary to the record of the case, as such the same is liable to be vacated. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that the respondent Set-I, have been promoted from BPS-17 to BPS-18 in the year 2022 vide Notification dated 2nd June, 2022, whereas the impugned posts have been advertised by FPSC in the year 2020, hence, the respondents Set-I are not entitled for promotion against the impugned posts., as such the status quo order is liable to be recalled. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that at the time of advertisement of the impugned posts, the respondents Set-I were neither entitled for promotion nor their rights in any manner have been infringed by the present respondents Set-II, as such the plea of the respondents Set-I is based on mala fide intention, hence, the impugned status quo order is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that out of total available 46 posts of Principal/Vice Principal/ Headmaster (BPS-19), the Education Department GB has initiated recruitment process of 16 posts under 35% quota for direct induction in accordance with SRO No.538(I)/2014, whereas the 65% quota for promotion has not been disturbed by the Education Department GB and at the time .of advertisement of the impugned posts, the promotion quota i.e. 65% have been fulfilled by promoting the deserved incumbents. The learned counsel for the applicants further argued that the 4-Tier structure in Education Department GB has been approved on 6th April 2020, whereas the requisition of the impugned posts was initiated on 15th June, 2019, hence the plea of the respondents Set-I is nothing but to mislead the Court. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that the Recruitment Rules of Education Department GB provide twelve years teaching experience in BS-17 or above or seven years service in BPS-18 for promotion to the posts of BPS-19, whereas the respondents Set-I have been promoted from BPS-17 to BPS-18 on 2nd June, 2022, hence the respondents Set-I are not eligible for promotion against any post of BPS-19. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that respondents Set-I have misguided this Hon'ble Court by placing interview schedule of another case at P-11 to Page-19 of their writ petition and further the respondents Set-I have sought suspension of operation of impugned Advertisement No.04/2020 dated 3rd June, 2020 and selection process of 64 posts falling under the 4-Tier structure as reflects from the impugned status quo order, whereas in the referred advertisement only 16 posts of Principal/Vice Principal/ Headmaster (BPS-19) (Male) have been advertised, then why the respondents Set-I have obtained the status quo order to the extent of 23 posts by challenging the Advertisement No.04/2020. The respondents Set-I have entirely misguided this Hon'ble Court by concealing the material facts in their writ petition, as such the impugned status quo order dated 06.01.2023 is not maintainable and liable to be recalled/vacated in the interest of justice.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents Set-I have vehemently opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicants and strongly defended the impugned status quo order by contending that the present applicants are not party in the writ petition, hence they cannot file the instant petition without impleading them as party in W.P. No.743/2022. The learned counsel for the respondents Set-I further contended that the Education Department have wrongly initiated requisition of the impugned posts which entirely fall in 4-Teir structure. The learned counsel respondents Set-I further contended that all the posts which fall in 4-Tier structure are required to be filled through promotion, whereas the respondents Set-II have illegally and unauthorizedly advertised the impugned posts to deprive the respondents Set-I from their due right of promotion. The learned counsel for the respondents Set-I further contended that case of the respondents Set-I is based on sound grounds and they are likely to succeed in their writ petition, hence if the status order is recalled the respondents Set-I will suffer irreparable loss and their right of promotion will suffer forever. The learned counsel for respondents Set-I further contended that this Hon'ble Court has also granted status quo in another case of similar nature against the impugned posts, as such the application of the applicants is not maintainable. The learned counsel for the respondents Set-I further contended that the respondents Set-II have advertised the impugned posts under the Recruitment Rules, 2014, which have been declared null and void by this Court in its judgment, as such the respondents Set-II have committed illegality by infringing the fundamental rights of the respondents Set-I. While concluding his arguments, the learned counsel for respondents Set-I contended that if the impugned status quo order is recalled/set aside, then the respondents Set-II will appoint fresh candidates which will further complicate the matter, therefore, the impugned status order may be maintained by dismissing the application of the applicants.
6. The learned DAG and LA have not opposed this application, rather they have supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicants and requested to vacate the status quo of the subject matter, as the entire process -of recruitment of the impugned posts has been completed and only final result is to be announced by FPSC.
7. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record available on file with their above assistance.
8. From perusal of record it transpires that the Director General had forwarded a requisition for FPSC to advertise the impugned posts of teaching cadre of Education Department GB according to SRO No.538(I)/2014 dated 6th June, 2014, as evident from the letter of Director General (Schools).
Gilgit-Baltistan No.DG-1(51)/2019 (AIS) dated 15th June, 2019. The FPSC had published consolidated advertisement No.04/2020 on 3rd June; 2020 as evident from FPSC's aforementioned advertisement available on record and last date for submission of applications of the intending candidates was 22-6-2020. Accordingly the present petitioners had applied for the said posts.
Thereafter, the FPSC has conducted written test of the present petitioners and interview of the petitioners was scheduled from 02.11.2022 to 04.11.2022 as evident from attendance sheet of, the present petitioners available on record.
9. It is pertinent to mention here that after promoting the officers of BPS-18 of Education Department GB to BPS-19 against promotion quota, the impugned posts were sent to FPSC to fill the same against direct quota as evident from office order dated May, 2019.
10. It would not be incongruous to mention here that the present respondents Set-I have been promoted to BPS-18, vide notification dated 2n4 June, 2022 and now they are claiming for promotion against the posts of BPS-19 before completion of one year probation period, whereas as per recruitment rules for promotion against a post of an officer (BPS-19), 12 years service in BPS-17 and above or 05 years service in BPS-18 is required which does not possess by the present respondents Set-I.
11. Moreover, the FPSC has completed recruitment process of the impugned posts and result is to be announced in near future/shortly and the present respondents Set-I have filed their writ petition in this Court on 06.01.2023 as evident from order sheet of this Court as such the respondents Set- I/petitioners of Writ Petition No.743/2022 have failed to make out a good prima facie case and also have failed to show that irreparable loss would cause if temporary injunction is not granted and balance of convenience is also not in favour of the present respondents Set-I/ petitioners of Writ Petition No.743/2022.
12. For the foregoing reasons, this petition titled under Order XXXIX, Rule 4, C.P.C. is allowed and the impugned order dated 06.01.2023 passed by this Court in W.P No.743/2022 is recalled and status quo granted in favour of the present respondents Set-I/ petitioners of W.P No.743/2022 is vacated.
13. This petition is disposed off accordingly. File.