' TALAAT QAYUM QURESHI, J.---Respondent No,3 advertised certain posts in BPS-17 in Daily Nawa-i- Waqt/Nation. In response to such advertisement, the petitioners submitted application. The Assistant Director Public Service Commission, vide his letter dated 28-11-2001 pointed out that the petitioners were overaged, hence Commission could not admit them for examination. During the process, the petitioners came to know that the rules whereby upper age limit by Public Service Commission was fixed were challenged in Lahore High Court Lahore through writ petition. The said writ petition was, however, dismissed in limine. Intra Court appeal filed against the dismissal order was also dismissed in limine. The orders passed by the learned Single Judge in the Lahore High Court were assailed by filing C.P.S.L.A 3792 of 2001 before the august Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Alongwith C.P.S,L.A an application for interim relief had also been filed. The Hon'ble Judge in Chambers allowed interim relief i,e, they were allowed to take examination subject to decision of the petition vide order dated 7-12-2001. Since the august Supreme Court of Pakistan had allowed the petitioners of C.P.S.L.A No,3792-L of 2001 to take examination, therefore, the Federal Public Service Commission allowed the petitioners to appear in examination subject to decision of their case. The petitioners duly participated in the examination but it was on 26-2-2002 that they were informed by respondents that their candidature has been rejected due to their being overaged.
The petitioners have assailed the letter dated 26-2-2002 through writ petition in hand.
2. Mr. Ijaz Anwar, Advocate the learned counsel representing the petitioners argued that as per Rules of 2000, the petitioners were entitled to appear in C.S.S. Competitive Examination up to the age of 30 to 35 years respectively. The petitioners, through the new rules framed in 2001 were deprived to appear in the examination though by appearing in the competitive examination they had a vested right to avail the next chance as per previous Rules.
3. On the other hand Mr. Hamid Farooq Durrani, the learned Deputy Attorney-General argued that the posts were advertised on 24-9-2001. Not only as per advertisement but as per Rule 4 the upper age limit fixed was 28 years. The petitioners being overaged were rightly disallowed. Reliance in this regard was also placed on a judgment of august Supreme Court of Pakistan passed in C.P.L.A.
No,940-K of 2001 (Miss Muneeza Zafar v. Federal Public Service Commission and another).
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record annexed with the writ petition.
5. As per advertisement dated 24-9-2001, the maximum age prescribed was 28 years as on 1-7- 2001. Syed Muhammad Amin, petitioner No,1 was on the said date i,e, 1-7-2001 overaged by one year and 28 days. Similarly Muhammad Hayat Wazir, petitioner No,2, was on the said date (1-7- 2001) overaged by one year 9 months and 26 days even after allowing him two years relaxation.
The Federal Public Service Commission Rules for Competitive Examination 2001 were made effective on 8-10-2001 and as per rule 4 (1) the maximum age limit for a candidate was 28 years.
6. The question which needs consideration in this case is whether Rules of 2001 would be applicable in the cases of petitioners would be governed under the previous Rules. The answer to this question was given by august Supreme Court of Pakistan in Constitutional Petition No,D-1207 of 2001 in the following words:-- "Neither the competency of respondent No,1 to change the rules in public interest could be challenged nor any candidate has vested right to be governed by any particular set of Rules. It is within the domain of respondent No,1 to make any alteration in the recruitment policy before finalization of the appointments. If the rules are altered/changed, the latter rules will supersede the former. Vested rights originate from contracts, statutes, and by operation of law. None of the above condition is attracted to this case. The Rules of 2000 could not be invoked for the examination to be held in the year 2001, when the rules of latter year were available. The order of High Court is perfectly correct and no interference is warranted."
7. Keeping in view the advertisement as well as rule 4 (1) of the Federal Public Service Commission Rules for Competitive Examination of 2001 and above quoted dictum of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan the candidature of the petitioners was rightly rejected.
7-A. Another factor which is important in this case is that as per the amended section 7 of the Federal Public Service Commission (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, a candidate, aggrieved by decision of the Federal Public Commission could within thirty days of such decision make representation to the Commission which was bound to decide the representation within 15 days after giving candidate a reasonable opportunity of hearing. A candidate could also, against such decision, within 15 days of the decision, file a review petition to the Commission and in, such eventuality the Commission was bound to decide the review petition within thirty days under intimation to the candidate. Thereafter, if still the candidate was aggrieved, by the decision of the Commission, he could within thirty days of the decision prefer an appeal to this Court. In the case in hand, the petitioners have failed to avail the alternate remedies mentioned above.
8. By virtue of amendment in section 7 of Public Service Commission (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, this Court has become the repository of E appellate jurisdiction. When this Court was the repository appellate, revisional or referable powers conferred by a statute, the writ petition was not maintainable as held in Khalid Mehmood v. Collector of Customs, Customes House Lahore (1999 SCM R 1881)
' Due to the reasons stated above, the, writ petition in hand is dismissed in along with C.M. No,515 of 2002.