' M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.---The appellants are residents of Tehsil Kamalia, they were appointed as P.T.C. Teachers in Tehsil Toba Tek Singh in 1995 and as their appointments were not made in accordance with the rules whereunder the appointments were to be made Markaz/Tehsilwise, therefore, the Education Department Government of the Punjab, vide its order, dated 26-3-1996 adjusted the appellants in there. Home Markaz/Tehsil i,e, Kamalia. The respondents 5 and 6, Muhammad Zahid Hussain and Muhammad Ramzan called in question the appellants' appointments as P.T.C. Teachers and their subsequent adjustment in Tehsil Kamalia through Writ Petition No,5535 of 1997 which was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 1-10-1997 and the appointments of the appellants were declared to be without lawful authority and the respondents 1 to 4 were directed to fill in the vacancies afresh in accordance with law. Hence, this Intra-Court Appeal.
2. The present appeal was admitted to regular hearing on 30-10-1997 and the operation of the impugned judgment was suspended and, therefore, the appellants have continued to be in service.
3. It has been held by the learned Single Judge that the appointments of the appellants were made at the behest of the Minister of Education and in derogation of the procedure which has no legal force. It has also been held that their appointments were made contrary to the policy of the Government which required that the recruitments be made on the basis of Markaz/Tehsil.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants were appointed as P.T.C. Teachers .By the competent Authority after the observance of all the formalities and their names were recommended by the Selection Committee for appointment, that there was no defect in the appointment of the appellant as the appointments were made on district-wise basis and not Tehsil/Markaz. It is also argued that the defect, if any, in the appellants' initial appointment due to their non-appointment on the Tehsil/Markaz-wise basis stood cured as vide orders dated 26-3- 1996 the services of the appellants were adjusted in their Home Markaz/Tehsil, prior to the institution of the writ petition and thus, no cause of action was disclosed in the writ petition. In the end, it has been submitted that the writ petitioners have no locus standi to challenge the appellants' appointments because they were not even qualified to be P.T.C. Teachers at the time when the posts were advertised or when the appointments were made.
5. Learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 while vehemently opposing the appeal has submitted that the appellants' initial appointments being contrary to the rules and against the Government policy of Home Markaz/Teshil-wise recruitments were ab initio void and, therefore, their subsequent regularization by the Government of the Punjab is of no consequence. It has also been argued that the appellants were appointed by the then Minister for Education who has no power to interfere in the process of selection, and therefore, on this score also the appellants appointments' are illegal.
6. The record reveals that the appellants were appointed, by the competent Authority after the due observance of all the formalities. The record also shows that the appellants' appointments might have been made in compliance with the orders passed by the Minister for Education, dated 21-1- 1995 but the fact remains that the appointments were made by the competent Authority and not by the Minister for Education, therefore, the appellants' appointments cannot be termed as ab initio void. The record shows that the petitioners were fully qualified to be appointed for the posts advertised and it is nobody's case that the appellants did not have merit to be appointed. Their appointments have seriously been challenged by the respondents 5 and 6 on the ground that they did not belong to Tehsil Toba Tek Singh fromwhere they were initially inducted into service. No doubt, the initial appointments of the appellants from Tehsil Toba Tek Singh was contrary to the Government policy of recruitment on the basis of Markazwise because the appellants belonged to Tehsil Kamalia. However, this defect stood remedied/cured and mistake of the appointing Authority was corrected by the competent Authority i,e, Government of Punjab by ordering the adjustment of the appellants' services in their Home Markaz/Tehsil. We are thus, of the view that as the initial irregularities in the appellants' appointments had been rectified by the Government even before the institution of the writ petition, therefore, the cancellation of their appointments through the issuance of a writ was not warranted. We have also noticed that the learned Single Judge has incorrectly observed that the appellants (respondents 5 to 16 before him) were residents of Toba Tek Singh and not of Tehsil Kamalia, whereas, the appellants are residents of Kamalia, and may be this mistake prevailed upon the learned Single Judge in declaring the appellants' appointments and later adjustment in Tehsil Kamalia as of no legal effect. We are also of the view that as respondents 5 and 6 were not even qualified to be appointed as P.T.C. Teachers at the relevant time, therefore, they had no locus standi to challenge the appellants' appointments as P.T.C.
Leaches because they passed the P.T.C. Examination in the year 1996 when the selection of the appellants had already been made in the year 1995.
7. In view of the above, this appeal is allowed and the judgment, dated 1-10-1997 of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No,5535 of 1997 is set aside with no orders as to costs. 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.