CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.-- The brief facts, giving rise to this appeal/are that respondent No. 3 was nominated by respondent No. 1 u/S. 5(I)(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. 555/98 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 provisions of Punjab Boards Act, 1976 and is in violation of Article 25 of the Constitutior. 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 he directed against the appointment of respondent No. 3 alone on the ground that he did not requisite qualification to he 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 Board 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 he reveal that he must he equated with the ' status of Principal Members or Headmaster: that educationalist must he 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 conditioned precedent; similarly appellant has 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 P.L.D. 1968 SC 313. He further urged that respondent No. 1 has exercised his discretion properly and his Court has no jurisdiction to take the cognizance of same in Constitutional jurisdiction, therefore, writ in nature of quo-warranto cannot be issued as is evident from the prayer of his writ petition, bona fide and approached this Court with unclean hands; he relied upon has not 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 considerations, is as to whether Ch. Iftikhar Khan 'respondent Nti 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,
(i) Section 2 (f) Controlling authority means the controlling authority specified in section 11;
(ii) Section 2(9) Govt. Means the Govt. Of Punjab;
(iii) Section 2(L) 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 educationist;
(10) Powers of a Board
(i) to hold and conduct all examinations pertaining to Intermediate Education, Secondary Education, Pakistani and Classical languages and such other examinations as may be determined by the Govt.
(ii) to prescribe courses of study for its examination;
(iii) to lay down conditions for recognition of institutions.
(I I) Government shall he controlling authority of a Board; (I2) ........ 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 II 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 he nominated by the Controlling Authority; (7) one Principal of Intermediate College situated within the jurisdiction of the Board to he nominated by the controlling authority; (8) Two Headmasters and one Head-mistress of School situated within the area of Board to he nominated by controlling authority and (9) two persons to be nominated by the controlling authority from amongst scholars and retired educationists. 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.
7. From the above it is thus clear that originally the controlling authority was given unfathered 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 educationist. The case of respondent No. 3 falls under "retired educationists". The aforesaid expression is defined by Chambers 2Ist Century Dictionary in following meanings:- "EDUCATIONIST (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 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/Huminities and Sciences. The education is to he given to those students who come with success fro -n Primary Education. Upto what is known as Matriculation Examination. This being the position, we have to find out the meaning of intention of educationist 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 Eduction, Pakistani and Classical languages and such other examinations as may he determined by the Government. Its sub-clause (ii) prescribes that the Board have powers to prescribe courses 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 pivotal -position in area of imparting of Intermediate and Secondary Education and Fine Arts/Huminities and other disciplines. Naturally, the expression "Educationist" 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 he 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 educationist is to he interpreted and applied by the reference to the aforesaid purposes the powers and functions of the Board highlighted above . On the touchstone we are therefore not able to extract that the term/expression educationist can apply to a person who is an F.A. C.T. Teacher who had retired from a school/imparting the primary education and had never taught in sphere of Intermediate and Secondary Education. Very clearly, an educationist in terms of Section 2(ix) must be a person who must have acquired a remarkable expertizing in teaching imparting education to Intermediate and Secondary sector of education. On this reasoning, we have reached to 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 educationist/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 consequence.
8. 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 S.C. 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 fortified by the statement of learned counsel for Controlling Authority who candidly conceded that the question of hppointment 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 petkon by issuing a writ in the form of quowarrantoldeclaring 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 educationists to fill up a vacuum so left by this Board of Eduction.