' According to the petitioner his forefather belong to Karnal (East) Punjab and his grand parents had come to Khanewal where the petitioner's father was born in 1946 thereafter they went back to India but returned after partition and settled down in Khanewal. The petitioner's father, however, shifted to Karachi in 1969 and took up permanent residence therein. He worked on different jobs and remained employed with the Defence Officers Housing Authority from 1974 to 1989, when he resigned and started private business in Karachi. The petitioner's parents also acquired immovable property in Karachi. The petitioner was born in Karachi in 1976 and acquired his entire education right from primary to B.E. Level at Karachi. The petitioner was issued Domicile and Permanent Residence Certificate by District Magistrate, Karachi, South on 14-12-1993. His father was also granted Domicile and P.R.C. In Sindh.
2. On the basis of the aforesaid Domicile and P.R.C. The petitioner was admitted in the Bachelor of Engineering courses offered by the N.E.D. University and passed his B.E. Civil Engineering in 1998. He sat in the- Central Superior Services Examination held on 22-1-2000 at the Karachi Central. The petitioner was declared one amongst those who have passed the written examination on 30-5- 2001. Llo\\ ever, by a letter, dated 12-6-2000 from the respondent No,2 he was informed that the respondent No,1 had accepted him as a candidate domicile in Punjab in terms of rules 6(iii)(a) and 6(iii)(h) of the Competitive Examination Rules. The petitioner promptly addressed a letter, dated 15- 6-2000 to the respondent No,2 stating all facts and contending that he should be treated as a candidate from Sindh (Urban) for the purpose of allocating an occupational group in response of prescribed quotas for different provinces/areas. Nevertheless he did not receive any reply and has, therefore, moved this Court for redress. It may be pertinent to add that on 2-3-2001 the petitioner has sought permission to amend the petitione and in the amended petition it has been disclosed that he cleared the viva voce examination and was offered appointment in the Income-tax Group (which was his 4th choice) on account of being treated as a candidate from Punjab and denied appointment in the preferred group of Police, D.M.G. And Customs. It is stated that the petitioner stand at serial No,3 in the order of merit of candidate from Sindh (Urban).
3. Admittedly rule 6(iii)(a) of the Rules for Competitive Examination framed by the respondent No,2 do provide that in the case of a candidate whose father belongs by birth or by origin to a province/area it is irrelevant where candidate has resided or received education and he will be considered against the quota of vacancies reserved for the province/area to which his father belonged, therefore, upon strict application of the rule the decision of the respondent might be unassailable. Nevertheless the validity of such rules against the touchstone of the Constitution and the question of strict literal application has been the subject-matter of serious forensic controversy.
4. In Tafakhar Ali Assadi v. Federal Public Service Commission (C.P.L. A . No,1276 of 1999) the petitioner had approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court under more or less similar circumstances.
He was admittedly born and resided in the Province of Balochistan and had acquired his education in that province. Nevertheless in view of his father's birth place in Punjab he was treated as a candidate from that province and his petition before the Balochistan High Court was dismissed upon strict application of the abovementioned rule 6(iii)(a) of the Rules for Competitive.
Examination. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, however, granted leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court and also passed an interim order, dated 13-9-1999 requiring the Federal Public Service Commission to treat him as a candidate from Balochistan. A similar question arose before this Court in Shazia Toor v. Federal Public Service Commission (C.P. No,D1894 of 1999) and a Division Bench of which one of us (Sabihuddin Ahmed, J. Was a member) admitted the petition and, considering the Supreme Court precedent and the obligation to act in aid of the Supreme Court passed an interim order directing that the petitioner be treated as a candidate from Sindh (Urban).
A petition for leave to appeal against the aforesaid order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Surpeme Court.
5. Though apparently the controversy has not yet been resolved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the petition filed by Shazia Toor and many others involving similar question came-up for final hearing before this Court. Through a consolidated judgment announced on 8-8-2000, Rule 6(iii)(a) of the Competitive Examination Rules was held to be ultra vires under Articles 15, 25 and 27 of the Constitution. It may, however, be pertinent to mention in all fairness to the respondents that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted leave to appeal against the aforesaid judgment and suspended its operation.
6. Therefore, C.P. No,D-1648 of 2000 (Abdul Kadir Sheikh v. Government of Pakistan) involving the same question came up before this Bench on 18-4-2001. We did not consider it proper to pass any interim order, as desired by learned counsel for petitioner in view of the fact that the Hon'ble Surpeme Court had considered it proper to suspend the operation of the final judgment on the controversy. Neverthellss, the fact that certain amount of urgency concerning the career of young people was involved, we thought it expedient to decide the matter expeditiously instead of allowing it to remain on the docket of this Court indefinitely ' and to enable any aggrieved party to approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Considering ourselves to be bound by the earlier Division Bench judgment, dated 8-8-2000 and there being no judgment to the contrary by the Hon'ble Supreme Court we allowed that petition vide our order, dated 26-4-2001. In this case, after having repeatedly called out the case and no appearance having been made by the learned Deputy Attorney- General or any other counsel on behalf of the respondent, we have decided to allow this petition as well directing the respondent treat the petitioner as a candidate from Urban Sindh effect of this judgment, however, will 'remain suspended for two weeks.
Petition allowed/