HYDERABAD: The conduct of the screening test by the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) to fill lecturer posts in government colleges has been challenged in the Sindh High Court (SHC).
Petitioner Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari, a candidate for the test, also challenged the commission’s plan to shortlist the candidates who qualified the written test for interviews.
According to the petitioner, the vacancies of 1,500 BPS-17 lecturers were advertised on November 24, 2019, requiring at least second-class postgraduate degrees for eligibility. The advertisement stated that the candidates would be considered for interviews following shortlisting after the written test, as per SPSC recruitment regulations.
“This [shortlisting] is discrimination,” argued Maheshwari’s lawyer in court, citing the SHC’s judgments in earlier petitions that third parties such as the National Testing Service (NTS) or Institute of Business Administration (IBA), Sukkur, should conduct the screening.
SHC sends ECP notice over PS-52 by-election delay
“The SPSC is violating the orders by holding the screening test itself,” the lawyer contended. The petitioner maintained that nepotism and corruption would play a role in the appointment of a large number of lecturers if the SPSC alone conducted all the tests.
Maheshwari also questioned the SPSC’s capability to hold timely tests, pointing out that tests for education department vacancies announced on February 22, 2019, had still not been held. He further alleged that a screening test conducted by the SPSC for the Combined Competitive Exams on January 5 contained erroneous questions.
The petitioner prayed the court to order the SPSC to engage either the NTS or IBA Sukkur to conduct the screening. He also pleaded the court to declare the SPSC’s January 23 notification, telling candidates that tests would commence in early March, a violation of court orders.
Maheshwari further urged the court to direct the SPSC to conduct interviews of all candidates qualifying the written test, rather than selectively shortlisting from them.
Putting the commission on notice to submit its reply, the bench adjourned the hearing for three weeks.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 21st, 2020.
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ