MIAN GHULAM AHMAD, J.- The petitioner got appointment as PTC teacher on 18.7.89, but the appointment was cancelled after some time. Subsequently on 17.5.93 again she claims to have been selected on merit for appointment as PTC teacher. She joined her duty in the Govt. Girls Primary School Dalhaiter on 29.5.93, on 7.8.93, however, the appointment order was withdrawn, with the observation that on verification the sports certificate produced by her had been found to be spurious.
2. It is pleaded by the petitioner that after she had joined service, there vested no authority in her speriors, the respondents, to recall the order of appointment. The learned counsel has not been able to explain as to how was the appointing authority divested of the powers to make any consequential order, after having made approve into the appointee's testimonials and credentials and how wee they debarred from examining the genuineness of a particular certificate tendered by her, entitiling her to such appointment. She should, of course, have been associated with such an inquiry and granted an opportunity of hearing before making a final determination about fictitious or spurious character of one of her testimonials. Probably, she was still in probation phase, where her services could be terminated without a notice even.
3. Anyhow, this being clearly a service matter, the only course open to the petitioner was to have approached the Service Tribunal for redressal of her grievances. Under Article 212 of the Constitution, writ petition is not maintainable^ The same is dismissed in limine.