KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has issued notices to the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) and other respondents on a petition challenging the 2018 examination results of the SPSC.
The two-judge bench headed by Justice Mohammad Shafi Siddiqui also called the record of the examination at the next hearing.
The petitioner contended that the respondents had allegedly violated an order of the Supreme Court by not fulfilling the procedure and alleged that the exam was mismanaged and manipulate by the chairman and others officials of the SPSC by selecting ‘blue-eyed’ candidates.
The petitioner said he was a candidate of the 2018 exam and also an employee of the SPSC and contended that being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the conduct and selection procedure of the respondents who did not consider him for an interview.
The petitioner further argued that he had also appeared in the combined competitive examination in 2013 and had challenged the result in the SHC and in 2016 the Supreme Court took suo motu notice of it.
He further maintained that the apex court had declared the result as null and void and issued directions to re-conduct the same on the laid down guidelines.
Impleading the chief secretary of Sindh, secretary services general administration & coordination department, chairman of the SPSC, its two members, controller, secretary and others as respondents, the petitioner argued that in the final result of the 2018 exam, the candidates’ identify had been concealed by removing the father names and caste of the candidates in order to hide the relationships of alleged blue-eyed candidates.
He was of the view that the respondents had committed contempt of the apex court order by hiding the identity of candidates, not displaying the mark sheets of all failed candidates and also not exhibiting the merit list.
The petitioner further submitted that he along with other employees of the SPSC approached the authority concerned and raised their apprehension over alleged discrimination and victimisation in writing but the same was not addressed, adding that the chairman also issued him a show-cause notice.
He further contended that the tenure of appointment of chairman and members of the commission in other such institutions was three years, but in case of the SPSC the tenure was five years.
The petitioner pleaded to restrain the SPSC from declaring the results till the disposal of the petition and to call the entire record of the examination.
He also asked the court to declare the interview result as null and void. He also sought directive for respondents to comply with the directions and guidelines of apex court.
Published in Dawn, December 31st, 2019