Restrain SPSC from holding exam on April 7: petitioners

Two men go to court against SPSC chairperson for 'incompetence'


Our Correspondent March 25, 2015
Two men go to court against SPSC chairperson for 'incompetence'. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) issued on Tuesday notices to the provincial chief secretary and the advocate general on a petition challenging the appointment of the chairperson of the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC).

Petitioner Mumtaz Ali and Syed Shahbaz Ali Shah Masoomi seek his removal claiming that the chairperson is incompetent to hold the post and an order to restrain the authority from conducting the combined competitive examination, which is scheduled for April 7.

Ali claimed that jobs are being sold against millions of rupees to the elite and their families. The appointment of SPSC chairperson Saleem Bhounr was already challenged in the SHC because he never served the five-year period in service at grade BPS-20 in either the Sindh or the federal government.

Co-petitioner Masoomi alleged that the commission had illegally held the screening test to qualify people for the written exam and set the passing marks at 30 per cent. Later, they were changed to 50 per cent. He argued that nine questions on the exam have wrong answers and there is no provision to hold the screening test in the commission rules.

The children of the elite were allowed to use unfair means to cheat during the test held on December 28, 2014, and nine grace marks were awarded to the favourites who had failed, he claimed. The petitioners pleaded the court declare the appointment of Bhounr as illegal and to restrain the authority from conducting the test on April 7.

A division bench, headed by Justice Munib Akhtar, issued notices to the chief secretary, Bhounr, the examination controller and the advocate general to file their comments by April 16.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 26th, 2015.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ