Blunders in CSS results


Express June 19, 2010

LAHORE/ISLAMABAD: The Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) on Friday withdrew the earlier notified names of successful candidates who appeared in the Central Superior Services (CSS) Examinations 2009 and qualified for recruitment to BS-17 posts under the federal government, The Express Tribune has learnt.

The action was taken after some mistakes were pointed out in the results put up on the official website of the FPSC for one day.

The error apparently occurred due to a computer glitch, and sources say that an internal enquiry has been initiated to look into the matter. The FPSC IT chief said that the results were taken off the web on the instructions of the DG Exams and the secretary.

The FPSC on June 15 had announced that 895 candidates had been selected for the final stage of the CSS Examination 2009, but sources told The Express Tribune that the computer department of the FPSC committed a serious blunder in compiling the results.

The FPSC realised their mistake on June 17 when they had started to prepare the result cards of the successful candidates to dispatch to their home addresses.

Sources said that, according to FPSC rules, a new list should be announced within a day. They also said that FPSC Chairman, Justice (retd) Bhagwandas has issued a suspension order for the concerned staff.

Approached for comment, Justice (retd) Bhagwandas told The Express Tribune that, “I am not in Islamabad and am travelling to Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The FPSC’s secretary will answer any questions regarding the examinations.”

However, FPSC’s newly-appointed Secretary Naheed Rizwi has been on leave for the last 15 days and was not available to comment.

The FPSC has apologised for the technical failure and the new and corrected CSS results have been announced on FPSC’s website.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 19th, 2010.

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