Petitioner claims to be an employee in the Education Department as PTC teacher after his induction into service as such under the order dated 11-2-1990 of the then Deputy District Education Officer (M), Tehsil Phalia According to the petitioner, he was posted, on administrative grounds, in his own pay and grade, at Government Middle School, Sandanwala Markaz, Pahrianwali Tehsil Phalia vice one Walayat Hussain PTC, on 31-10-1990. His grievance is that on the subject of "Stoppage of pay", the respondent-Deputy District Education Officer. Tehsil Phalia at Mandi Baha- ud-Din has issued a Memo. No. 2002/E.I, dated 18-3-1993 to among others, the Assistant Education Officer, Markaz Phalia, which reads as under:-- "It has been brought to the notice of the undersigned that the following teachers were appointed against leave vacancies in your Markaz and they are still working which is against (of) rules and regulations of the Department. You are therefore requested to direct their concerned Drawing & Disbursing Officers to stop their pay and compliance report in this respect alongwith their complete particulars may please be supplied to this office up to 21-3-1993 positively without any delay, so that action under rules can be taken against them. It may be treated Top-Priority S.No. Name of Teacher and school.
(1) ....................
(2) Mr. Ijaz Ahmad s/o Muhammad Din P/S Dandka.
(3 - 8) ......................
He has sought the issuance of a writ/order in the nature of certiorari for removal of order dated 18- 3-1993 and when asked to indicate the rendering of any order by the competent authority in relation to the petitioner's service as a temporary hand, the learned counsel was content with arguing that the impugned order has been passed without hearing the petitioner and that the fate of his case is a foregone conclusion, in view of the positive direction made in Memo. No.2002/E.I, dated 18-3-1993.
2. A perusal of the material placed on the record by the petitioner himself shows that the respondent-authorities are seized of the cases of those employees who were appointed against leave-vacancies in the past and their continuation in service as such is contrary to the Rules and Regulations of the Department. It is an admitted position that the matter has not been finalised so far. The argument that the petitioner was not appointed against leave vacancy to attract the penalty clause in Memo. No. 2002/E.I, dated 18-3-1993 and that consultation of the relevant record by the respondent-authorities may result in a favourable order in that regard even now, is sufficient to hold that this petition has been instituted prematurely and that too without making a demand for justice by the petitioner from the respondent-authorities. Confronted with this situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested for disposal of his petition as withdrawn with the observation that in the- event of the petitioner bringing his side of the picture to the notice of the concerned Deputy District Education Officer in black and white, the same shall be taken into consideration before resolving the dispute to his extent. So be it.