PESHAWAR: A University of Peshawar committee probing the alleged malpractices in the holding of BS semester make-up examination for PTI MNA Murad Saeed has declared the whole process controversial and dubious and found the lawmaker’s detailed marks certificate to be incorrect and fake.
Dawn has obtained copies of the inquiry committee report and the unsigned tampered detailed marks certificate and answer sheets of Swat MNA’s BS semester make-up examination under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act, 2013.
The documents make some startling disclosures giving the lie to Murad Saeed’s public pronouncements on the matter.
The documents revealed that the unsigned DMC prepared by a former assistant at the UoP Department of Environmental Sciences was checked with the actual record of Murad Saeed and was found to be incorrect and fake.
Inquiry panel says Murad Saeed’s exam controversial and dubious, detailed marks sheet incorrect and fake
Besides, marks in the unsigned DMC were also ‘fudged.’
The committee also noted that Murad Saeed appeared in three papers on the same day and attempted all three papers in less than one hour.
The MNA, a student of the UoP Department of Environmental Sciences from 2005 to 2009, has filed a petition in the Peshawar High Court seeking orders for the University of Peshawar to issue him a degree.
Interestingly, the basis of his legal battle against his alma mater is a copy of unauthenticated detailed marks certificate, which the inquiry report in its nine-page report said was incorrect and fake.
While seeking the court orders to get his BS degree insisting he had cleared the examination, the MNA did not tell the court that he had appeared in the make-up examination conducted on March 2, 2015.
The documents secured by Dawn reveal that the unsigned DMC was tampered with and instead of his actual marks in English, which were 56, he was shown to have received 63.
In the Introduction to Environmental Science, Murad Saeed was absent, however, in the unsigned DMC, which he claims to be genuine; he was shown to have received 60 marks.
Similarly, in Statistics, Murad Saeed had actually obtained 47 marks, whereas the unsigned DMC shows him having received 77 marks.
In Applied Ecology (Population & Assessment), he was shown to have received 42 marks in the unsigned DMC as against 26 actual marks.
In Remote Sensing, in the 6th Semester, he received 21.6 marks, while the unsigned DMC shows he received 41 marks.
“No advice from the controller of examination, BS semester committee and for that matter the Vice Chancellor was taken in the case. All the three papers were attempted on the same day i.e. March 2, 2015, which makes the whole process controversial and dubious,” said the inquiry report.
It may be recalled that the controversy came to light when Murad Saeed put up an application to the chairman of the relevant department requesting him to issue the clearance of results and signed copy of the DMC.
The inquiry committee headed by Professor Gulzar Ali Khan, dean of the UoP faculty of Numerical and Physical Sciences, in its report not only declared the MNA’s DMC null and void but also raised doubts about the standard and quality of the make-up examination hurriedly arranged by the department for him.
“Questions on the standard/quality of the papers can be raised. Conduction of the make-up examination was not held in the prescribed manner as it was neither discussed in the semester examination committee nor notified,” said the inquiry report.
An interesting aspect of the whole controversy is the quality of multiple choice questions and short questions included in the make-up examination.
In short questions, he was asked to define acid rain and ozone, name five pesticides and five rivers of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and tell when the environmental act was approved.
Statements of the faculty members showed that examination for Murad Saeed was arranged haphazardly.
Question papers were prepared the same day, examination was conducted the same day and the results were also declared there and then making the whole process dubious.
Bushra Khan, associate professor of the relevant department, informed the inquiry committee that Murad Saeed attempted three papers in less than one hour and the examination results were declared the very same day.
“The department has its own semester examination committee, but no one (including myself) was consulted before the decision on his exam was taken. There were some flaws in the entire process,” she told the committee.
The committee quoted Shahla Nazneen, teacher and coordinator of BS Programme of the department, as saying that Murad Saeed could not complete his degree requirements in time for certain reasons and therefore, results of his examination could not be declared along with other batch mates.
Ironically, the committee said in its report that Dr Mohammad Nafees, a member of the faculty, had set two papers; one of 30 marks with a total duration of 60 minutes as midterm paper and the final term of the maximum marks of 50 with a total allocated time of 90 minutes on single piece of paper.
“A question on the quality of the paper can therefore be raised,” said the document.
The committee recommended, “Muzakir Shah, the then dealing assistant at the Department of Environmental Sciences, who prepared and issued fake DMC to Murad Saeed on March 7, 2011, might be proceeded under the Employees Efficiency and Discipline Statutes 1977.”
In its concluding remarks, the committee observed that the attendance sheet was not available.
“The answer sheets of the papers, Introduction to Environmental Science, Mid Term and Final Term, are not signed by the teacher concerned (Dr Nafees),” it said.
The committee further recommended that the faculty members, who were not authorised to issue statement to media on the issue might be dealt with under the Employees Efficiency and Discipline Statutes 1977 and in light of the decision of the Syndicate 1992.
Published in Dawn, April 22nd, 2015