1. During the process of consideration, it is noticed that the representation filed by the petitioner is pending before the respondent No.4, therefore the petition at the admission stage itself, is taken for disposal. 2. The conceptual background of Rehbar-e-Taleem scheme is laudable. The underlying object of making up the deficiency of the staff at the elementary level of Education, is to ensure over all development and the personality of the children. Consequential interactive process has an object to check incidence of drop out. It is in the background of the laudable object of the scheme (Rehbar-e-Taleem), the Government vide order No. 597-Edu of 2003 dated 2.6.2003 has accorded sanction to the creation of one thousand, one hundred and seventy nine (10,179) posts of (3rd) teacher for Primary Schools in the consolidated pay (on the Rehbar-e-Taleem pattern) and also creation of hundred posts of teachers for upgradation of one hundred Primary Schools to Middle Schools. Selection/engagement of candidates has to be purely on merit basis by a committee comprising Director School Education (of the province), Chief Education officer and Principal, DIET (of the respective Districts). 3. In pursuance of the said Government Order, an advertisement notice has been issued from the office of respondent No.4, whereunder applications have been invited village-wise on prescribed format for the engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem teachers in various schools which include two posts in P/S Chiniwala situated in village Sangla Zone Bufliaz. In pursuance to Government order No. 288 of 2009 dated 8.4.2009, Addendum has been issued on 15.7.2009 by respondent No.4 and following explanation has been added to the said advertisement notice: "Village means a revenue village. However, where habitation in a revenue village are scattered, a candidate belonging to a habitation, popularly known as a village, at least one kilometer away from other habitations and having a population of more than 300 persons only, shall he entitled to seek engagement as Rehbr-e-Taleem in a local school." Out of the two posts, one was for Math teacher and another for Science teacher. Two merit lists, one for Science and another for Math stream have been prepared by the respondent No.5. Petitioner’s name figure at S. No. 3, whereas respondent Nos. 6 and 7 figure at S. No. 1 and 2 respectively in the list pertaining to candidates for Mathematics. 4. Two merit lists, one for Science and another for Math stream have been prepared by the respondent No.5. Petitioner’s name figure at S. No. 3, whereas respondent Nos. 6 and 7 figure at S. No. 1 and 2 respectively in the list pertaining to candidates for Mathematics. 4. As against the merit list petitioner has filed the representation before the respondent No.4, objecting the inclusion of the name of respondents No. 6 and 7 on the ground that they belong to other habitations i.e. habitation Shiba and Kummarian when the petitioner belongs to habitation Chiniwala. As per the scheme the candidate resident of habitation, where the school is situated and vacancy is to be supplied, has a preferential right, based on which the candidates belonging to other habitations have no right of consideration unless candidate is not available from the concerned habitation. Claiming the benefit of above referred explanation, petitioner would contend that he is residing at a distance of Zero Kilometer from School Chiniwala, so has a preferential right. 5. The respondents except respondent No. 6 have not filed reply. The reply as filed by respondent No.6 in opposition to the claim of the petitioner is that the ward Shiba adjoins the Chiniwala ward and fall in the same revenue village Sangla. 6. The object of the scheme has to be advanced in its real spirit. The explanation as referred to above has been added which provides that in case habitations in a Revenue village are scattered, then candidate belonging to habitation, at least one Kilometer away from the other habitations and having population of more than three hundred (300) persons, shall be entitled to seek engagement. 7. The crucial question as emerge for consideration is, as to whether the habitations of the Revenue village Sangla are scattered, if yes, then whether the habitation Shiba and the habitation Kummarian of the Revenue village Sangla are at a distance of one Kilometer from Chiniwala and whether habitation Chiniwala has population of more than three hundred people. If the answer is in affirmative, then the petitioner has preferential right. 8. Petitioner in order to support his contentions has placed on record a resolution prepared by the village Education Committee, wherein the two candidates i.e. petitioner for the post of Mathematics and another Rashid Ahmad for the post of Science teacher have been shown fit for appointment in M.S. Chiniwala. 8. Petitioner in order to support his contentions has placed on record a resolution prepared by the village Education Committee, wherein the two candidates i.e. petitioner for the post of Mathematics and another Rashid Ahmad for the post of Science teacher have been shown fit for appointment in M.S. Chiniwala. The said Rashid Ahmad figure at S. No. 1 in the merit list viz-a-viz Science teacher. 9. Order No. 241 DRD of 1997 dated 23.8. 1997 as placed on record would indicate that in the Panchayat Sangla Upper, there are as many as ten Constituencies and all the ten Constituencies have their own areas. In the said order Chiniwala Shiha and Kummarian are shown different Constituencies of the village Sangla Upper. The requirement for determining the preferential claim of the petitioner, is dependent on the determination of the above referred question. 10. In the backdrop of the aforesaid circumstances, it is incumbent upon respondent No.4 not to give effect to merit list as prepared For Math post, until representation of the petitioner is decided, in the context of the claim of the petitioner as noticed above. 11. This writ petition as such is disposed of with the direction to the respondent No.4 to decide the representation of the petitioner filed on 31.10.2009, as is pending before him, after proper inquiry into the question of position of the habitation as claimed by the petitioner in the light of the explanation added to the notification pursuant to Addendum dated 15.7.2009. In the process of accord of consideration, both petitioner as well as respondents No. 6 and 7 shall also be associated and appropriate decision shall be taken, as shall be warranted within a period of six weeks from today. The position of the merit list as prepared for Math post shall abide by the decision so taken. It shall be open for the petitioner to re-agitate, if cause survives.