Muhammad Arshad petitioner was a candidate for the post of Naib---Qasid in the set-3 of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Multan. Interviews were held on 27th and 28th of September, 1993, but he was not selected. As many as 16 others, listed in Annexure R.1, appended with the comments, offered by the Deputy Secretary (Admn.) of the Board, were recruited. They include those arrayed as respondents Nos.4 and 6 in the writ petition, filed by Muhammad Arshad, assailing their appointment and praying for suspension of the orders of their appointment.
2. Submission is that every recruitment, even at the lowest level, must be made on merit and there should be no discrimination and favouritism. Due weight should be given to better qualification and experience. Ignoring all that the Authorities have made appointments of their favourites, being their relatives. Names of Muhammad Yousaf, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Arif, Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Arshad have been given in that context.
3. In their comments the Board people have said that there were as many as 449 candidates for 16 posts and the requisite qualification was that the candidate should be somewhat educated, besides being able to drive a bicycle. The Selection Committee, approved by the Education Minister, consisted of the (i) Secretary of the Board, (ii) Deputy Director (Colleges), Multan and (iii)
Deputy Director (Schools and Secondary), Multan. It is maintained that the main criterion was physical fitness or smartness and better, educational qualification or longer experience had no weightage in the matter of merit. The Committee interviewed every candidate and selection was made strictly in accordancewith merit, as also in accord with the Recruitment Policy, dated 10-8- 1993 (replacing the previous policy dated 13-10-1992), and the relevant Rules of the Board. '
4. Muhammad Arshad, petitioner had initially been appointed as a `seasonal worker' on daily wages, and he worked in that capacity from 20-9-1991 till 31-12-1991. He was again appointed as Temporary Naib-Qasid, on daily wages, with effect from 10-2-1992 to 30-9-1993. The writ petitioner maintains that his services could not be terminated, and he was entitled to a show-cause notice. It is however to be borne in mind that a `seasonal' appointment does not confer on the daily-paid appointee any vested right. Only after an offer emanates and is accepted, and an appointment on regular basis is made, there would come into being a contract, and a party to it will be able to exercise his rights and enforce the other party's contractual liability. So long as one continues to be a temporary employee, borne on no regular cadre, he cannot claim to have been vested with a right, enforceable through Court. That may be true; but a perusal of the list of candidates and that of selectees reveals that no concrete criteria have been followed and selection has been made in a haphazard manner, and the same is based manifestly on personal likings and disliking of the members of the recruitment Committee, or kinship of the candidates with those already serving the Officers. Such selection is bound to bring in its wake large scale disgruntlement.
5. There is an unmanageable crowd of unemployed manpower in the country, and just one post attracts hundreds and dozens of candidates; and one does not know what to do. In civilised societies and democratic orders administrative machinery functions with conscious awareness to .All such problems; particularly the monster of unemployment is not permitted to assume horrifying proportions. In our country, nobody, over the years, has paid even the slightest attention to this malady, and the appalling apathy has thrown countless youngsters and teaming millions into sheer frustration and yawning starvation.
6. The petitioner is a matriculate and has also a good length of period of service in the same Department, to his credit, which may be treated as experience. I do not think that he deserves the treatment meted out to him. The learned counsel for the Board has held out an assurance that the petitioner, whose services as seasonal worker are being utilised, may continue in the same capacity. Petitioner, however, has the apprehension that, he will never be absorbed permanently into the `fold'. Even if, strictly speaking, a right to initial recruitment may not be enforceable through discretionary writ jurisdiction of this Court, it is expected that the Board will strive, in a sincere way, to take the petitioner regularly on the rolls of its employees. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.