(1.) THE instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment and order dated 08.05.2008 rendered by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition of the appellant -petitioner which was registered as SWP No. 531/2007. The basic reason for dismissing the writ petition was that the appellant -petitioner did not respond to the advertisement notice by filing an application for his consideration, therefore, he did not participate in the selection process. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant -petitioner, relying upon the endorsement of the Headmaster, making recommendations for his enlistment in the list of the unemployed youth of village and appointment as Rehbar -e -Taleem, was rejected because it could not be regarded as application in response to the advertisement notice dated 08.11.2004.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Rizwan, learned counsel for the appellant - petitioner has argued that an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for amendment was filed to which reference has been made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and the same was dismissed.
(3.) IT is true that the appellant -petitioner may not be able to secure appointment because he did not file any application for consideration of his candidature. However, once it has come on record produced before the Court that there is some interpolation and some one has tried to secure appointment fraudulently, then it was necessary to allow the amendment and determine the aforesaid issue raised before the learned Single Judge by filing the application. It is well settled that once allegation of fraud and illegal activity is brought to the notice of the Court then it must be probed.