1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Both these petitions are for leave to appeal from the same judgment of Balochistan High Court dated 2-5-1989 passed by the High Court in a Constitution Petition filed by respondents 1 to 5.
2. ' The respondents were appointed as Naib-Teshildars on ad hoc basis by various orders passed in 1987-88, and it was clarified in these orders that their appointments are on purely tempoprary basis, subject to further orders, and also subject to clearance under the Rules by the Divisional Selection Committee. Subsequently, the Commissioner who is the Appointing Authority advertised filling up of these posts by inviting applications from qualified persons. It was this action that was challenged by the respondents in the aforesaid Constitution Petition on the ground that since they were legally appointed in accordance with the Rules, they cannot be directed to re-appear and re- apply as fresh candidates.
3. ' The High Court held that "inviting applications for posts of NaibTehsildars occupied by the petitioners through advertisement in open contest is an act in excess of authority by the respondent (Commissioner)". In this regard the reasons that prevailed with the High Court may be reproduced hereunder: "It is admitted position that since their appointments till today the petitioners have not been called for clearance before the Divisional Selection Committee. And now by the advertisement they have been asked to compete with other candidates in Naib-Teshildari examination in open contest. It may be seen that for contesting the age limit of a candidate has been fixed to be 18 to 20 years on 1st December, 1988. Then he has to go through written and oral tests. Besides 50% posts are to go to direct appointees and 50% to promotees. From amongst 50% of direct-appointments 30% of the posts are to go to persons of rural areas. By these conditions on the face of it some of the petitioners would lose their jobs in spite of qualifying. Manifestly it is in violation of the conditions laid down in the appointment orders issued by the respondent."
4. ' The case of petitioners in C.P.LA. No, 27-Q of 1989, who are in the subordinate service, is that they are entitled to 50% quota reserved for them under Rule 5 of Balochistan Naib-Tehsildari Rules, 1980, and in this connection it is urged that there are only six vacant posts and as such they are entitled to three amongst these.
5. ' The case of the Commissioner, Quetta Division, who is petitioner in C.P.L.A. No, 31-Q of 1989 on the other hand, is that since respondents were appointed purely on temporary basis, they cannot claim any right on permanent basis which is the result of the impugned judgment of the High Court.
6. The aforesaid points, amongst others, deserve consideration. We, therefore, grant leave to appeal in both the cases. Security for costs is fixed only in C.P.L.A. No,27-Q of 1989 at Rs,500.
7. ' Appeals will be heard on the present record but it is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
8. ' Notice of Miscellaneous Applications in both these petitions shall issue to respondents for 8-6- 1989.