CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.---The brief facts, giving rise to this appeal, are that respondent No.3 was nominated by respondent No. 1 under section 5(1)(ix) of the Punjab Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education Act, 1976 as Member Board in the category of retired educationalist of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Rawalpindi for a period of three years. This happened vide Notification, dated 11-2-1998. The appellant being aggrieved filed W.P. No.555 of 1998 on the ground that respondent No.3 is F.A.C.T. only whereas the appellant is B.A. B. Ed., therefore, his appointment is not in accordance with the provision of Punjab Board Act, 1976 and is in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution. The writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment, dated 31-8-1998; hence the present appeal.
The learned counsel for the appellant on 7-12-1998 under instructions stated that he would not press his claim to be appointed as Member of the Board himself and that the instant appeal may be directed against the appointment of respondent No.3 alone on the ground that he had no requisite qualification to be appointed members as educationalist.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that respondent No.3 was only F.A.,C.T. and was retired as Vernacular English Teacher, therefore, he did not possess prescribed qualification as enacted by section 5(1)(ix) of the Punjab Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education Act, 1976.
3. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 stated that neither respondent No.3 nor appellant - falls under the category of educationalist; the word educationalist must reveal that he must be equated with the status of Principal, Member or Headmaster; that educationalist must be equated with the word scholar which is mentioned in clause (ix) of the aforesaid section.
4. The learned counsel for respondent No. 2, stated that writ petition was rightly dismissed by the learned Single Judge as the appellant is not aggrieved person which is condition precedent; similarly appellant has no locus stand to file writ petition against the nomination of respondent No.3 by respondent No. 1 which is discretion of the controlling authority i.e., respondent No. 1 to nominate any retired educationalist, therefore, the same does not fall within the purview of judicial review; he relied upon PLD 1968 SC 313. He further urged that respondent No. 1 has exercised his discretion properly and this Court has no jurisdiction to take the cognizance of same in Constitutional jurisdiction, therefore, writ in nature of co warranto cannot be issued as is evident from the prayer of his writ petition, therefore, the appellant did not file writ petition bona fide and approached this Court with unclean hands; he relied upon (1983 CLC 2734). He also relied upon different provisions of Punjab Boards Act, 1976 and emphasised that it is the prerogative of the controlling authority to nominate any retired educationalist. Respondent No.3 is admittedly retired Vernacular English Teacher and his qualification is also F.A., C.T.
5. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 adopted the arguments of respondent No.2. He urged that writ petition as well as I.C.A. is liable to be dismissed on the short ground that the appellant has not made Province of Punjab as respondent. He further stated that respondent No.3 has vast experience of education; therefore, the competent Authority has nominated him.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for parties at length and attended to their competing contentions. The only question, which arises for the consideration, is as to whether Ch. Iftikhar Khan/respondent No.3 herein was validly appointed as Member Board within the terms of section 5(ix) of Punjab Boards Act, 1976 and whether he has any legal warrant to continue as such. In order to answer the above question we find it expedient, to refer relevant applicable provisions of Punjab Boards Act, 1976.
(i) Section 2(f). Controlling Authority means the Controlling Authority specified in section 11;
(ii) Section 2(g). Government' means the Government of Punjab;
(iii) Section 2(1). Member means a member of a Board; (iv)
(v)
(vi)Section 5. Constitution of a Board: Board shall consist of the following members, namely: (i)The Chairman; (ii)The Vice-Chancellor of the University or a University Professor nominated by him; (iii)All Directors of Education related to the area within the jurisdiction of a Board; (iv)The Director of Technical Education Punjab, Lahore or his nominee: (v)One representative of the Syndicate of the University; (vi)One Principal of a Degree College situated within the jurisdiction of the Board to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; (vii)One Principal of an Intermediate College situated within the jurisdiction of the Board to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; (viii)two Headmasters and one headmistress of school situated within the jurisdiction of Board to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; (ix)two persons to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; originally clause (ix) is aforesaid which was subsequently amended in the following terms: --- Two persons nominated by the Controlling Authority from amongst scholars and retired educationalist; (x)Powers of a Board: (1)
(2)In particular and without prejudice to generality of the powers conferred 4 by the preceding subsection, a Board shall have the power--- (i)to hold and conduct all examinations pertaining to Intermediate Education, Secondary Education, Pakistan and Classical languages and such other examinations as may be determined by the Government; (ii)to prescribe courses of study for its examination; (iii)to lay down conditions for recognition of institution.
(11)Government shall be Controlling Authority of a Board; (12)
A plain look at the above section shows that under section 2, defining provision, Controlling Authority meant as that authority specified in section 11. Section 11 clearly shows that this authority is Province of Punjab. Section 5 deals with the constitution of the Board. It indicates that the Board shall consist of (1) Chairman; (2) Vice-Chancellor of University or University Professor nominated by him; (3) Directors of Education related to the area within the jurisdiction of a Board; (4) Director of Technical Education, Punjab, Lahore or his nominee; (5) one representative of Syndicate of the University; (6) one Principal of a Degree College situated within the jurisdiction of the Board to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; (7) one Principal of Intermediate College situated within the jurisdiction of the Board to be nominated by the Controlling Authority; (8) two Headmasters and one Headmistress of School situated within the area of Board to be nominated by Controlling Authority and (9) two persons to be nominated by the Controlling Authority from amongst scholars and retired educationalists. This sub-clause is of significance. The whole controversy revolves around it. Previously, this sub-clause enacted that Controlling Authority was to nominate two persons; however, thereafter, this was amended in following terms: Two persons nominated by the Controlling Authority from amongst scholars and retired educationist.
From the above it is, thus, clear that originally the Controlling Authority was given unfettered power to nominate two persons of his choice. Nevertheless, this was amended and was provided that the Controlling Authority was to nominate two persons from amongst scholars and retired educationalist. The case of respondent No.3 falls under "retired educationalists". The aforesaid expression is defined by Chamber's 21st Century Dictionary in following meanings: Educationalist(noun) an expert in methods of education". Similarly, education is defined by Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition in following terms:--- "Comprehends not merely the instruction received at school or college, but the whole course of training; moral, religious, vocational, intellectual, and physical. Education may be particularly directed to either the mental, moral, or physical powers and faculties, but in its broadest and best sense it relates to them all. Acquisition of all knowledge tending to train and develop the individual."
From the above definition, it is, thus, clear, that education connotes not only instructions received at college but the whole course of A training, moral, religious vocational, and intellectual being imparted in that institution. In this case, the Principal had to be nominated as a Member, Board of Secondary Education, Rawalpindi which is basically established to cover Intermediate and Secondary Education and disciplines of Arts/Humanities and Sciences. The education is to be given to those students who come with success from Primary Education up to what is known as Matriculation Examination. This being the position, we have to find out the meaning of intention of educationalist by reference to another provision of Act namely section 10 of the Act. It enumerates the powers/functions of the Board. Sub-clause (i) of ibid says that the Board shall have power to organise, regulate and control Intermediate and Secondary Education. Its second subsection prescribes that Board shall have powers to hold, conduct all examinations pertaining to Intermediate Examination, Secondary Education, Pakistani and Classical languages and such other examinations as may be determined by the Government. Its sub-clause (ii) prescribes that the Board have powers to prescribe course of study for its examinations. Sub-clause (iii) states that the Board shall lay down the conditions for recognition of institutions. A clear analysis of the above section will show that Board occupies a pivot position in area of imparting of Intermediate and Secondary Education and Fine Arts/Humanities and other disciplines. Naturally, the expression "Educationalist" as implied in section 2(ix) had nexus with the afore-stated functions and powers of the Board. In order to find out the meaning of this expression, it is very natural that the provisions of the Act have to be examined organically, systematically and without citation of any relevant applicable provisions. Applying this principle to provisions noted above we are, thus, clear in our mind that the expression educationalist is to be interpreted and applied by the reference to the aforesaid purposes the powers and functions of the Board highlighted above. On that touchstone we are, therefore, not able to extract that the term expression educationalist can apply to a person who is an F.A., C.T. Teacher who had retired from school/imparting the primary education and had never taught in sphere of Intermediate and Secondary Education. Very clearly, an educationalist in terms of section 2(ix). must be a person who must have acquired a remarkable expert zing in teaching imparting education to Intermediate and Secondary Sector of Education. On this reasoning, we have reached the clear conclusion that Mr. Iftikhar Khan/respondent No.3 was an F.A., C.T. Teacher and was not possessed of qualification to be nominated as an educationalist/Member, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Rawalpindi. This appointment of respondent No.3 was clearly without any lawful authority and is in continuous as such, which is clearly of no lawful consequences.
It is well-settled, that if a person occupies a public office and who is not qualified to occupy it, this Court has power to issue a writ of quo warranto. The reference be made to PLD 1963 SC 203. As a result of the foregoing discussion, we have, thus, reached the conclusion that the appointment of Iftikhar Khan/respondent No.3 as a Member of Board of Education is totally without lawful authority and he has no legal authority to remain in that office for the remaining period. We have also been fortified by the statement of 'learned counsel for Controlling Authority who candidly conceded that the question of appointment made by Secretary was totally without lawful authority and will not be made in future. In result, we allow this Intra-Court Appeal, set aside order passed by learned Single Judge and accept this writ petition by issuing a writ in the form of quo warranto/declaring that the appointment of Mr. Iftikhar Khan/respondent No. 3 as a Member, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education from inception and continuing as a Member is of no lawful consequences.
The Controlling Authority shall forthwith appoint a Member from the class of educationalists to fill up a vacuum so left by this Board of Education.