Stereo. H C J D A-38.

JUDGMENT SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Writ Petition No. 68978 of 2021

Dr. Maha Fatima Tariq

Versus

Government of Punjab through Chief Secretary, Lahore &

others

JUDGMENT
Date of hearing: 22.12.2021.
Petitioner by: Khawaja Tariq Sohail, Advocate.
Respondents by: Barrister Ameer Abbas Ali Khan, A.A.G. along
with Hamid Shahzad, Law Officer, Primary &
Secondary Healthcare Department.

MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, J.- Through instant

petition, petitioner has sought direction from this Court for the
respondent-authorities to issue appointment letter in her favour as
Woman Medical Officer (“WMO”) (BS-17) w.e.f. 04.08.2021, being
recommended / selected candidate, with the following prayer:-
“In view of the above submissions, it is, therefore, most
respectfully prayed that the instant writ petition may kindly be
allowed and appropriate directions may very graciously be
issued to the concerned quarters to issue appointment
orders of the petitioner w.e.f. 04.08.2021 by granting similar
treatment as have been given qua the other Medical Officers
etc. without any further delay and discrimination. The
complete record of recruitment process conducted by DRC
on 25/26 June 2021 may also be summoned in the safe
administration of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner, being

eligible, applied for the post in question and was selected purely on
merit vide letter dated 02.07.2021, after conducting interviews by the
District Recruitment Committee (“DRC”), but respondents in
violation of the rules and policy have notified the names of three other
WMOs, whose names were even not reflected in the original merit
list, however, petitioner was not notified without any lawful reason or
 2
Writ Petition No. 68978 of 2021

justification. He adds that impugned inaction on the part of

respondent-authorities to issue appointment order in favour of
petitioner is absolutely unsustainable in the eye of law. In support, he
referred to Muhammad Asif Jan and others v. Chairman Selection
through Chairman and others [2013 PLC (C.S.) 502], Tayyaba
Komal v. District Coordination Officer, Sialkot and 4 others [2014
PLC (C.S.) 378], Jawad Ali and others v. Superintendent Jail and
others [2017 PLC (C.S.) 587], Nazia Khan v. Province of Sindh
through Secretary Education and 3 others [2020 PLC (C.S.) 101] and
Rasheed-ud-Din and another v. Provincial Government through Chief
Secretary, Gilgit-Baltistan, Gilgit and others [2020 PLC (C.S.)
1029].
3. When confronted, learned Law Officer could not rebut the
above submission that petitioner was recommended by the DRC, but
contends that petitioner was recommended against the post of Medical
Officer and no appointment letter was issued to any Woman Medical
Officer against the post of Medical Officer, thus, neither any
discrimination was caused nor any right of appointment was accrued
in favour of petitioner. He further submits that interview does not
create vested right of appointment unless the process is finalized or
appointment letter is issued.
4. Arguments heard. Available record perused.
5. Perusal of record shows that the Government of the Punjab,
Primary & Secondary Healthcare Department, Lahore advertised
vacant posts of MOs (639) / WMOs (441), to be appointed on purely
ad hoc / temporary basis, in daily newspapers. Soon after the first
advertisement, respondent-department published corrigendum in the
newspaper clarifying that advertised posts will be filled according to
vacant positions of each category in every district instead the number
of posts mentioned against each category previously, purely on ad hoc
/ temporary basis as per terms & conditions advertised earlier. The
DRC, headed by the Deputy Commissioner conducted interviews for
appointment of suitable candidates against 51 posts of MOs and 04
 3
Writ Petition No. 68978 of 2021

posts of WMOs, lying vacant under Chief Executive Officer, District

Health Authority, Lahore / respondent No.3 and recommended
suitable candidates including the petitioner for appointment to the post
in question vide letter dated 02.07.2021, relevant portion whereof is
reproduced hereunder:-
Subject: RECRUITMENT OF MEDICAL OFFICERS ON
ADHOC BASIS THROUGH WALK IN
INTERVIEW BY THE DISTRICT SELECTION
COMMITTEE.

I have the honour to enclose herewith the

original merit list of eligible candidates selected by
the District Recruitment / Selection Committee
under the chairmanship of Deputy Commissioner /
Administrator District Health Authority Lahore
through walk-in interview dated 26th of June 2021
for recruitment against the posts of Medical
Officers (BS-17) on adhoc basis in various Health
facilities of District Health Authority, Lahore as
detailed below:

Sr.# Name with Name of Selected

parentage of post for
selected candidates
… … … …
48 Dr. Maha Fatima Medical Selected
Tariq D/o Khawaja Officer against the
Tariq Sohail post of MO
for Govt.
Dispensary
Rajgarh
… … … …

The following documents are also attached as

desired:

Attested copy of I.D Card.

Attested copy of Domicile.
Attested copy of Matriculation Certificate.
Attested copy of Intermediate Certificate.
Attested copy of Graduation Degree / MBBS.
Attested copy of Registration with PMDC.
Attested copy of House Job Certificate.
Attested copy of experience certificate.

It is therefore requested that necessary orders may

please be issued for recruitment of above mentioned
candidates to the posts of Medical Officers (BS-17) at the
stations mentioned against each.”

6. It appears from the above reproduced letter that petitioner was

selected for recruitment against the post of MO being eligible
candidate, by the DRC and her name reflected in the original merit list
 4
Writ Petition No. 68978 of 2021

prepared by it. However, offers of appointment for the posts of WMO

were issued to Dr. Maha Ikram and Dr. Ayesha Javed, vide order
dated 11.08.2021 and Dr. Shamza Mehreen vide order dated
16.08.2021, however, petitioner was not appointed despite having
been recommended and selected by the DRC, as mentioned above.
7. The undisputed merit list had created a vested right in favour of
petitioner, which was required to be given due weight and regard as
she developed legitimate expectation to be considered for
appointment. No valid reason and implicit justification has been
rendered for denying appointment to petitioner. The post in question
was vacant and not abolished, thus, petitioner being successful and
placed in the merit list, a vested right had been created in her favour
for appointment as Woman Medical Officer. Reference can be made
to Muhammad Imran v. Punjab Public Service Commission Lahore
through Secretary and 3 others [2016 PLC (C.S.) 363], Muhammad
Javeid and others v. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government through
Chief Secretary and others [2016 PLC (C.S.) 1130], Munawar
Hassan v. Chief Secretary, Government of Balochistan and 3 others
[2017 PLC (C.S.) 81] and Fatima v. Federation of Pakistan through
Secretary Ministry of Commerce, Islamabad and 2 others [2018 PLC
(C.S.) 292].
8. Needless to say that the respondent-authority, in the present
case, has not exercised its powers in a fair and transparent manner,
which has deprived a suitable candidate from employment for no fault
of her own. Appointment in public sector is the trust in the hands of
public functionaries and it is their moral duty to discharge their trust
with zeal, efficiency and fairness as per law. Public authorities cannot
be allowed to play havoc with the fate of the masses. Discretion
vested with the public authorities should be exercised with
reasonableness and nobody can be left unbridled to tinker with the
future of the selected / recommended candidates. Therefore, the
impugned inaction is against fundamental rights of petitioner
 5
Writ Petition No. 68978 of 2021

guaranteed under Articles 9, 18, 25 & 27 of the Constitution of the

Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
9. It is argued that petitioner was recommended against the post of
Medical Officer mistakenly, therefore, he could not be appointed
against the post of Woman Medical Officer. Needless to say that
petitioner cannot be subjected to discrimination and penalized for a
wrong, lapse or ignorance on part of the department. Reference can be
made to Collector of Customs, Lahore and others v. Messrs S. Fazal
Ilahi and Sons through Proprietor (2015 SCMR 1488), Dr. Farhat
Naz v. Chairman Selection / Promotion Board, Ayub Teaching
Hospital, Abbottabad and others (2017 MLD 1842), Muhammad
Arshad v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Government of
Sindh and 9 others [2018 PLC (C.S.) Note 2], Managing Director,
Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) and another v.
Muhammad Zubair and 6 others [2019 PLC (C.S.) 1348] and Kh.
Aamir Ahmed v. Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir
through Chief Secretary and 6 others (2021 YLR 1313).
10. In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed and
respondents are directed to issue appointment letter in favour of
petitioner as per merit list of eligible candidates selected by the DRC,
preferably within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order. Compliance report shall be furnished to
this Court through Deputy Registrar (Judicial).

(Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi)

Judge
APPROVED FOR REPORTING

Judge
*A.H.S.*