Illegal appointment: IHC official requests review of hiring process in court
Assistant upper division clerk files request to see why results of his NTS tests were not made public
This was in contravention to Paragraph 79 of the apex court’s decision which stated that “any person appointed on contract against a permanent vacancy or against a promotion post violates of the spirit of the rule and untenable, and should be denotified.”PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
An official of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has requested the court to review recruitment for a BPS-14 grade post at the court, claiming that results for a test for the post were never announced.
Muhammad Shoaib, an assistant upper division clerk in the dispatch section of the IHC, requested a three-member committee of the court to look into some appointments made in 2013 and to check whether they were made on merit or otherwise.
The request was filed weeks after the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgment annulling illegal appointments made in the IHC. The judgment also paved the way for Shoaib to file his case.
In his application to the Senior Pusine Judge and chairman of a committee to review the appointments, Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi, Shoaib said that the court had advertised vacant posts of Assistant (BPS-14) in June, 2013. He had subsequently applied for a position based on the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) quota.
Shoaib, argued that while he appeared for a mandatory test by the National Testing Service (NTS), results for the test were never announced. He subsequently filed an application with the court’s registrar regarding the test results.
“No response has been received so far [to the application] although [advertised] appointments have been made,” he stated.
Arguing that the NTS publishes test results at every stage of testing, Shoaib said that by not announcing results of the test, the IHC was creating “doubts and reflect lack of transparency in the recruitment process by NTS.”
Referring to the paragraph 83 of the Supreme Court’s verdict in the illegal appointments case, Shoaib requested that the court look into the matter whether the appointments have been made on merit or otherwise
In the paragraph, the apex court had constituted a three-member committee to examine all appointments made from 2011 onwards in violation of the rules and, subsequently, order their de-notification.
The top court had directed the committee to complete the exercise within a period of one month from the day the judgment was communicated and submit a detailed report.
Atiqur Rehman, the IHC registrar who was re-hired on contractual basis in June, when approached for his comments on the matter said that he did not know any thing about the matter without hearing the question.
“I don’t know anything,” Rehman said, repeating the phrase a number of times before disconnecting the call.
IHC Chief Justice Anwar Khan Kasi had re-hired Rehman as the registrar on BPS-22 for a period of six months while allowing him to draw pension and salary as well.
The notification said that Rehman would get allowances, perks and privileges allotted to an officer of grade 22, including additional benefits extended by the court from time to time.
This was in contravention to Paragraph 79 of the apex court’s decision which stated that “any person appointed on contract against a permanent vacancy or against a promotion post violates of the spirit of the rule and untenable, and should be denotified.”
Published in The Express Tribune, October 9th, 2016.
An official of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has requested the court to review recruitment for a BPS-14 grade post at the court, claiming that results for a test for the post were never announced.
Muhammad Shoaib, an assistant upper division clerk in the dispatch section of the IHC, requested a three-member committee of the court to look into some appointments made in 2013 and to check whether they were made on merit or otherwise.
The request was filed weeks after the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgment annulling illegal appointments made in the IHC. The judgment also paved the way for Shoaib to file his case.
In his application to the Senior Pusine Judge and chairman of a committee to review the appointments, Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi, Shoaib said that the court had advertised vacant posts of Assistant (BPS-14) in June, 2013. He had subsequently applied for a position based on the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) quota.
Shoaib, argued that while he appeared for a mandatory test by the National Testing Service (NTS), results for the test were never announced. He subsequently filed an application with the court’s registrar regarding the test results.
“No response has been received so far [to the application] although [advertised] appointments have been made,” he stated.
Arguing that the NTS publishes test results at every stage of testing, Shoaib said that by not announcing results of the test, the IHC was creating “doubts and reflect lack of transparency in the recruitment process by NTS.”
Referring to the paragraph 83 of the Supreme Court’s verdict in the illegal appointments case, Shoaib requested that the court look into the matter whether the appointments have been made on merit or otherwise
In the paragraph, the apex court had constituted a three-member committee to examine all appointments made from 2011 onwards in violation of the rules and, subsequently, order their de-notification.
The top court had directed the committee to complete the exercise within a period of one month from the day the judgment was communicated and submit a detailed report.
Atiqur Rehman, the IHC registrar who was re-hired on contractual basis in June, when approached for his comments on the matter said that he did not know any thing about the matter without hearing the question.
“I don’t know anything,” Rehman said, repeating the phrase a number of times before disconnecting the call.
IHC Chief Justice Anwar Khan Kasi had re-hired Rehman as the registrar on BPS-22 for a period of six months while allowing him to draw pension and salary as well.
The notification said that Rehman would get allowances, perks and privileges allotted to an officer of grade 22, including additional benefits extended by the court from time to time.
This was in contravention to Paragraph 79 of the apex court’s decision which stated that “any person appointed on contract against a permanent vacancy or against a promotion post violates of the spirit of the rule and untenable, and should be denotified.”
Published in The Express Tribune, October 9th, 2016.