' An advertisement announcing vacancies of Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors and Senior Registrars in Sheikh Zayed Medical Complex, Lahore, was published in the press inviting applications from eligible persons by 18-10-2003. The said advertisement included the post of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professor in Transplant Surgery (Kidney). Petitioner No,1, who is Associate Professor, and petitioner No,2 an Assistant Professor, both in the Department of Urology Sheikh Zayed Hospital Lahore feeling aggrieved thereof have assailed the same through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 with the grievance that a new cadre namely Transplant Surgery (Kidney) has been created as a device to shower "undue advantage to some officers from outside the Urology Department". According to them, the result thereof would be "to enable officers to be inducted into Urology cadre." They have the apprehension that the same will "sabotage and destroy" their established seniority. It is thus prayed by them that:--
(i) "Respondents be restrained from treating "Transplant Surgery (Kidney)" as a distinct special field in its own right which has the status of a subject within the contemplation of Regulations framed by PMDC and other relevant Laws.
(ii) Respondent may be directed to treat Urology as the basic subject; and a special field per se and to make promotions in accordance with the Seniority List prepared for Urologists without any distinction as to whether or not a particular Urologist has conducted more operations of "Transplant Surgery (Kidney)".
(iii) It be declared that all Urologists are competent to perform Kidney Transplant Surgery and that there is no rational justification to treat "Transplant Surgery (Kidney)" as a distinct special field in the category of Urologist.
(iv) Respondents be restrained from processing any application for appointment to any teaching post as advertised as the criteria and conditions laid by the competent authority such as teaching experience cannot be fulfilled.
(v) Impugned decision to select Transplant Surgeons for kidneys be declared to be a mala fide device which has the design to cause dishonest advantage to less qualified Urologist at the expense and cost of more qualified and experienced colleagues.
(vi) Any other relief deemed appropriate in the peculiar facts of this case may also be afforded to the petitioner."
' Report and parawise comments were called from respondents-which have been filed by Sheikh Zayed Medical Complex Lahore.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel that Kidney Transplant Surgery is not any recognized or separate specialty which according to him is part and parcel of Department of Urology and creation of a separate and distinct department is aimed at to give accelerated promotion to few favourites whereas the petitioners will be adversely affected by this action of the respondents. It is contended that regulations framed by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council do not recognize any such specialty as a separate department of Transplant Surgery (Kidney), thus the respondents are acting contrary to law.
' The learned counsel for Sheikh Zayed Hospital, (respondent No,2) has with reference to the stance of the hospital taken in the parawise comments contended that existing Department of Urology will not be disturbed nor the conditions of service of the petitioners will in anyway be adversely affected. According to him, the petitioners have no locus-standi to maintain this petition or to challenge the establishment of a separate Transplant Surgery Center. It is contended that setting- up of such a specialty is need of the time due to the influx of patients of such diseases. It has also been contended that the new inductees in the Transplant Surgery Center would have a separate identity and channel in service structure which will not in any way alter the conditions of service of the petitioners. Besides, he objects to the maintainability of the petition due to bar of jurisdiction contained in Article 212 of the Constitution and lack of locus standi. To support his stance that Transplant Surgery is receiving special attention and separate treatment, Ike cites examples of other countries, on the, basis of his research from internet.
' The respective contentions of the learned counsel have been considered.
3. Needless. To state and emphasize that setting up a new Department or Specialty falls Within the policy decision making of the Government/institution concerned, who may have sound basis, and good reasons aimed at to serve the suffering humanity and to cope with the disease. Court cannot pry into the rationale or the adequacy of such a decision, nor should interfere with the same.
4. It may be observed that sum and substance of the grievance of the petitioners has been mentioned above. In paragraph 9 of the petition it is pleaded by the petitioners that they "The petitioners have all along remained under the impression that appointments to these posts will not cut across the category of Urology as a distinct field of specialization. It is for this reason that at the earlier stages, the petitioners did not entertain any apprehension of adverse impact from the appointment of any incumbent in the office of "Transplant Surgery (Kidney)". Since they did not apprehend an adverse impact on their placement in the Seniority list of the Urology Cadre or otherwise their entitlement for promotion in the special field, no redress was sought earlier.
However, it is now being openly and clearly stated that inductees into the office of "Transplant Surgery (kidney)" at various level are to be treated as Urologists in the Department of Urology. The device is to recruit officers even at the leEl of Professor who shall mainly do the usual work of Urology but who would get a higher office simply by dint of selection as "Transplant Surgery (kidney)" Specialist. Obviously this has adversely affected the petitioners and other officers like them, who have been employed in the category of Urology and whose seniority list takes into account their placement in this special field will be pushed to a side for no fault of theirs."
The reply filed 'by respondent No,2 to this is that "the Department of Urology shall continue to be a distinct field of specialization apart from Transplant Surgery (Kidney). The two different Departments shall be independent of each other. Seniority for each Department shall be separate in terms and rules of Services of respondent No,2. The remaining contents of this paragraph are denied as the same are figment imagination of the petitioners."
' Taken the apprehension of the petitioners and stance of the respondents as pleaded respectively in the context of assurance held out by respondent No,2 that "The petitioners being Urologists hold and shall continue to hold their current Seniority for promotion to Higher Posts i,e, leading up to the post of Professor', Department of Urology, hence they shall not be prejudiced in Any manner' by the creation of Kidney Transplant Center" (Paragraph No,2 of preliminary objections), the grievance of the petitioners should set at rest. It may be observed that whereas the learned counsel for the petitioners stated in clear terms that there was no objection to nor any relief, is sought for preventing the setting-up of specialist center, there is unambiguous assurance expressed in the parawise comments and reiterated by the learned' counsel for respondent No,2 before the Court that the seniority of the petitioners in the Department of Urology will not be disturbed nor their conditions of service will be adversely affected, clinches the matter.
5. Insofar as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents are acting in violation of the regulations of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council, is concerned that should not be concern of the petitioners inasmuch as if there be any violation of the regulations, the Council may take appropriate steps and action to avert any such situation in accordance with law, which has vast power of inspection and requiring information. The petitioners have no locus standi in the matter qua any such assumed violation.
' The learned counsel for respondent No,2 has stated that in pursuance of the impugned advertisement, no selection was made and fresh process is to be undertaken for appointments.
That may furnish a chance and opportunity to the petitioners as well to compete with others if they are considered eligible.
' The petition is thus dismissed with the above observations.