MUHAMMAD BASHIR KHAN JEHANGIRI, J.---Dr. Shah Wali Khan, petitioner, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the learned Division Bench of Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dated 31-7- 1995 whereby a contempt application filed by the petitioner was found to be misconceived and was accordingly dismissed.
2. The facts of the case, as narrated in the impugned judgment, are that a post of Assistant Professor (Orthopaedics) had fallen vacant in the Post-Graduate Medical Institute, Peshawar, which was to be filled in through selection by the Provincial Selection Board from amongst the Senior Registrars possessing the requisite qualifications and experience. The petitioner was found to meet these conditions and was included in the list of Senior Registrars while respondent who when posted as Senior Registrar, Bolton Block in Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar, was omitted from the said list. Respondent No.2 feeling aggrieved filed before the Peshawar High Court Writ Petition No.2084 of 1991 to challenge the inclusion of the name of the petitioner in the list of Senior Registrars and claimed that he being Senior Registrar in possession of the requisite qualification and experience be declared as eligible for promotion as Assistant Professor Orthopaedic. The learned High Court ultimately found respondent No.2 to be duly qualified and possessed of experience and, therefore, held him equally eligible or promotion to the post of Assistant Professor Orthopaedic. The writ petition was thus allowed vide judgment of the Peshawar High Court dated 16-3-1993.
3. The petitioner, who was respondent No.3 in the writ petition, filed before the High Court Civil Miscellaneous Application No.445 of 1995, and expressed the grievance that after the disposal of the writ petition aforesaid respondents Nos.l and 2 "in violation of the order of the High Court" had referred the names of Dr. Shahabuddin respondent, Dr. Khurshid Ali respondent and the petitioner for the appointment of the post, of Assistant Professor Orthopaedic at Serial Nos. l, 2 and 3 and thus the petitioner was placed junior to Dr. Shahabuddin in the list which was clear contempt of Court and, therefore, prayed to the High Court to initiate the contempt proceedings against respondents Nos. l and 2 the writ petition.
4. The learned Judges of the Division Bench reproduced in the impugned order, the following portions of their judgment in the writ petition which read as under:-- "The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at the bar that the eligibility of the petitioner does not stand in the way of Dr. Shah. Wali respondent No.3 and in the light of the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner at the bar let the case of Dr. Shah Wali respondent No. 3 be cleared for promotion. "
They also reproduced the direction issued to respondent No which reads as under:-- "To place the name of the petitioner before the Provincial Selection Board for consideration for appointment/promotion as Assistant Professor Orthopaedic. "
5. After close scrutiny of the above parts of the judgment, the learned Judges found themselves clear in their minds that they had held that while the eligibility of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor was altogether clear and, therefore, directed respondent No. l to follow it.
According to them, they had further held that "Dr. Shahabuddin would be equally treated likewise".
According to the learned Judges, they have in their judgment held Dr. Shahabuddin and Dr. Shah Wali Khan equally eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor Orthopaedic. In this view of the matter Dr. Shah Wali Khan petitioner was held to have "wrongly placed premium on our observation in his favour that this Court had directed respondent No. l to straightaway promote Dr. Shah Wali Khan to the post of Assistant Professor Orthopaedic and his selection by the Provincial Selection Board be relaxed". Ultimately it was held that no question of violation of the order of the High Court dated 16-3-1993 passed in Writ Petition No.2084 of 1991 was involved and thus held the application for contempt proceedings as misconceived.
6. Mr. Jehanzeb Rahim, Advocate Supreme Court, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the observations of the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the Peshawar High Court on the dismissal of the application for contempt proceedings were not borne out from the record and need to be interfered with by this Court.
7. The plenary jurisdiction to interpret the judgment of the High Court rested with the learned Judges of the Division Bench who had the occasion to decide it. The learned Judges have found that the ratio of their judgment clearly was that both Dr. Shah Wali and Dr. Shahabuddin were equally eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor Orthopaedic and, therefore, it was open to the competent Authority to make selection of any one of them or any other eligible doctor for promotion to the post according to law, which reason does not seem to be misplaced or unfounded.
8. We find that the impugned order of the learned Judges of the Peshawar High Court suffers from no legal infirmity of kind warranting our interference in this Criminal Petition for leave to appeal which is accordingly dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.