KARACHI: Credibility of IBA tests questioned in SHC
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, Dec 10: Credibility and locus standi of the tests conducted by the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, was questioned in the Sindh High Court on Monday when arguments in the petitions of Sui Southern Gas Company’s employees continued.
The division bench comprised the Acting Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court, Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed, and Justice Ali Aslam Jeferi.
Barrister Kamal Azfar, representing Barkat Ali Jatoi and 39 other engineers and management employees of the SSGC Ltd had impugned the notice of June 12, calling upon the petitioners to appear in IBA test.
It was contended that the petitioners had already been issued letters of appointment pursuant to the decision of the Federal Service Tribunal (FST) of April 13, absorbing the petitioners in the service of the SSGC vide a letter dated June 8.
Barrister Azfar, who concluded his arguments Monday, submitted that the SSGC had not filed any appeal with the Supreme Court, so the order of the FST had acquired finality. It was also contended that the subsequent letter dated June 12, requiring the petitioners to appear in IBA test was without lawful authority and of no legal effect because the IBA test had no relevance for engineers. Moreover, the petitioners had acquired vested rights to continue as employees of the company, and IBA test could not be held after the absorption of the petitioners, which was contrary to the principle of Locus Poenitentiae and the law of estoppel as enunciated in the case of M/s Army Welfare Sugar Mills Limited Vs Federation of Pakistan by the Supreme Court.
As regards the maintainability of the petition, Mr Azfar relied upon Mohammed Raees Vs Abdul Haseeb (PLD 1994 SC 539) in which it was held that the question of fitness of an employee was not hit by the bar contained in article 212 of the constitution and the tribunal had no power to entertain any appeal in which the question of fitness was involved.
The main thrust of the arguments of Aqil Awan, representing some other petitioners, was that the petitioners had been confirmed under the order of the FST, and now the company, under its administrative order, could not nullify the effect of the impugned order of the FST. It was his contention that if the petitioners were put to IBA test for selection, it would mean deconfirmation.
Effect of judicial order could not be undone by the company management, he argued.
It was also his contention that every executive order must be backed by law. He maintained that there was no such law. Mr Awan cited the Lahore High Court’s judgment in the case in which the Khidmat Committees had been challenged.
He contended that the petitioners had been appointed in 1995 and were confirmed by the FST in 1999 and 2000. He asked why they were not put for any such test before. His contention was that asking the petitioners to undertake IBA test, after they had been confirmed by the FST, was mala fide and void. It was also termed discriminatory.
Mr Awan argued that confirmation was the vested right and a confirmed employee could not be put to such test again. A regular employee could not be subjected to what was IBA test.
He argued that when the employee was with employment his services were government by statutory rules.
With regard to the bar under article 212 of the constitution, he disagreed with the contention of the SSGC, and claimed that for all practical purposes the company was an arm of the government. In this context, he also referred to its Memorandum of Association.
Abdul Mujeeb Pirzada, counsel for some other petitioners, showed to the bench the recent press clippings of the reports pertaining to leakages in IBA test papers for admission to medical colleges, and questioned the credibility of such tests.
Wasim Sajjad also chipped in his point of view. Barrister Jameel, representing the SSGC, objected to Wasim Sajjad’s criticism of the IBA tests, and said the had no right to stand here and object to the IBA tests. If they were not satisfied with the IBA tests, why did they not object at the initial stage, he contended.
