Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC) has received a legal notice seeking to bar its Board of Governors (BOG) from approving revised criteria for hiring employees against various posts.
It is also interesting to note that the BOG has scheduled a meeting today (Tuesday) to approve the revised criteria for hiring employees, a process that started a year ago. Meanwhile, the government is already conducting a performance audit of PARC to determine whether it should be dissolved or merged with another department.
According to the legal notice, the appointment and extension of Dr Ghulam Muhammad Ali as Chairman of PARC have been challenged in Writ Petition No 2240/2024 before the Islamabad High Court (IHC). The court, in its judgment dated January 15, 2025, ruled that the chairman of PARC is not holding his office legally. The PARC BOG is advised to await the Division Bench's ruling on the legality of Ali's appointment/extension before proceeding with any key policy decisions in its upcoming 48th meeting of the Board scheduled for March 11, 2025. The appeal is set for hearing on March 12, 2025, as per the legal notice.
The management of PARC, led by Dr Ghulam Muhammad Ali, is accused of acting in bad faith. On March 5, 2024, and May 9, 2024, they advertised hundreds of regular positions, including Principal Scientific Officer (SPS-10/BS-19), Senior Scientific Officer (SPS-09/BS-18), Scientific Officer (SPS-08/BS-17), and Assistant Scientific Officer (SPS-07/BS-16) in the national press.
The recruitment criteria were allegedly tailored to favour ineligible candidates, violating PARC's Recruitment Criteria-2017, Regulation 8(3) of the PARC Employees (Service) Regulations, 1984, and the Federal Government's recruitment policy guidelines. The advertised recruitment criteria deviated from established standards as the requirement of post-qualification experience was omitted for the posts of Principal Scientific Officer (SPS-10/BS-19) and Senior Scientific Officer (SPS-09/BS-18). The stipulated number of years of experience required of the Principal Scientific Officer (SPS-10/BS-19) was reduced from 12 to 10 years. The maximum age limit for Scientific Officer (SPS-08/BS-17) was lowered from 35 to 32 years, limiting the pool of qualified candidates. The introduction of the Assistant Scientific Officer (SPS-07/BS-16) position was done with newly defined recruitment criteria in violation of established norms.
This recruitment process and tailored advertisements have been challenged in the Islamabad High Court, which has passed an injunctive order against the said recruitment process. During the last hearing in WP No 2094/2024, PARC presented a proposed Recruitment Criteria-2024, admitting that it had already been published in March and May 2024, including application solicitation, followed by written tests and interviews, despite still being pending approval by the BOG in its forthcoming 48th meeting.
The proposed Recruitment Criteria-2024, formulated by a lower-level committee, was advertised without prior review and approval by the Executive Committee (EC), a mandatory step before submission to the BOG under Regulation 8(3) of the PARC Employees (Service) Regulations, 1984. Even if approved by the BOG in its forthcoming meeting scheduled for March 11, 2025, the said criteria would have significant legal implications for the ongoing recruitment process already initiated and conducted using unapproved criteria.
During the period 2022-23, PARC made 332 illegal appointments against 164 advertised positions through tailored advertisements. Allegations of nepotism and favouritism include the recruitment of blood relatives as well as manipulation of written test results.
The audit concluded that appointments made in excess of advertised posts and without observing provincial/regional quotas were irregular and unauthorised. The audit has recommended a fact-finding inquiry to probe the matter.
Questions were sent to chairman PARC and secretary food, but no response was received.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ