MUHAMMAD TANVEER versus FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
RR 25 (ii) and 27 Federal Public Service Commission Ordinances (XLV of 1977), section 7 (a) and 10 candidates were not selected for any professional group / service after which they were provided as their preference. Groups / Services may not be eligible. The scope of Rule 25 of the CSS Exam Rule 25, 2009 was that it should assign candidates to any professional group through the Federal Public Service Commission, as it was ranked No. 130 according to its eligibility. ? On the one hand, provided that the CSS Examination Rules, provided for in the 2009 Regulation provided that a candidate be considered only for the groups / services he indicated in the application form, however , The candidates have been given the choice to modify their choice. At the time of the voiceover, professional groups, whose priority was considered final and thereafter no change was allowed, and on the other hand, the government had this authority under roll 27 of the CSS Exam Rules, 2009 To assign any group to any group. / Priority of the candidate irrespective of service, and like any Rule 25 (II) and 27, disregarding each other in the CSS Exam Rules, Rule 25 of 2009, a candidate may be referred to a professional group / Refuses to be considered for the Services. Which it did not apply to, but the aforementioned rule gave the candidate the opportunity to review the selection of professional groups / services at the time of the voiceover, and his amended priorities would not be considered final. Subsequently, Rule 25 of the CSS Exam Rules, 2009 was approved, which was adopted by the Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance 1977.
