Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 344 of 1981, decided on 30th January, 1984.

----‑‑Ss. 7 & 10 ‑ Federal Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1979, rr. 2 (f) & 12‑Central Superior Services‑Recruit ment‑Public Service Commission conducting joint competitive examination for Grades 16 and 17, held, competent to determine suitability of candidate either in Grade‑16 or Grade‑17.‑‑[Civil service].

---‑‑Ss. 7 & 10 and Federal Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1979, rr. 2 (f) & 12‑Central Superior Services‑Recruit ment to Grades‑16 and 17 through competitive examination Combined result of test comprising written examination, interview and viva voce, held, to be taken into consideration by Commission for recommending candidate for a particular post in Grade‑16 or 17‑Notwithstanding total marks obtained by candidate he shall not be considered for appointment to any of groups/posts for which he has been declared unsuitable by Commission at time of viva voce test.‑[Civil service].

---‑‑Ss. 7 & l0‑Federal Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1979, rr. 2 (f) & 12‑Provisional Constitution Order (I of 1981), Art. 9‑Central Superior Services‑ Recruitment to Grades 17 & 16 posts‑Federal Public Service Commission competent to hold joint competitive examination for recruitment to posts in Grades‑17 and 16 under Federal Government, and empowered to recommend candidates for posts in Grade‑17 or 16‑Petitioner failing to establish that Commission acted mala fide, arbitrarily or in violation of any provision of law or statutory rules in not recommending him for post in Grade‑17‑Interference declined in writ jurisdiction.‑[Civil service].

Qazi Muhammad Jameel for Appellant.

Raza A. Khan, Dty. A.‑G. for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 6th December, 1983.

‑----Amiruddin Shah has brought this constitutional petition for declaring the impugned omission/action of the respondents as without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

2. The facts as gleaned from the writ petition briefly are that the petitioner appeared in the Competitive Examination of Central Superior Services in the year 1980. He qualified the written examination, psychological test and viva voce. His name did not appear in the list of the successful candidates and one enquiry he came to know that amongst seven successful FATA candidates he stood at Serial No. 5. All of them except him were allocated the jobs though candidates at serial Nos. 6 and 7 bad secured lesser marks than those obtained by him. He had qualified to be appointed to Grade‑17 but his name was omitted and such omission was mala fide and without lawful authority.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the petitioner had been successful in the examination and had qualified to be appointed to a post in Grade‑17 but the respondent Federal Public Service Commission had acted without lawful authority and arbitrarily to recommending him for appointment to a post in Grade‑16. He added that merit was determined by the marks obtained and there being no other criterion for it and the petitioner having obtained more marks than the other two candidates was entitled to be recommended for Grade‑17. The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand; maintained that the Commission bad conducted the combined Competitive Examination for recruitment to posts in Grades‑17 and 16 and since the petitioner was found not fit for appointment to Grade 17 it was within the competence of the Commission not to recommend him for the same.

4. A notice for the competitive Examination to be held by the Federal Public Service Commission (hereinafter called the Commission) for recruitment to posts in Grades‑l7 and 16 under the Federal Govern ment was issued and Rules for admission to examination were stipulated therein. Rule 12 under the beading "Appointments" reads as under :‑

"12. Subject to the Recruitment policy explained in Appendix IV of these Rules, candidates securing the highest places on the combined results of the written examination, Psychological and viva voce tests and eligible for appointment will be appointed up to the number of vacancies available. No candidate will however be considered for appointment to any of the Groups/posts for which he/she has been declared unsuitable by the Commission at the time of viva voce Test.."

It is manifest that the candidates are to secure the highest places on the combined results of the written examination, psychological viva voce tests. Moreover, no candidate can claim to be considered for appointment to any of the Groups/posts for which he/she has been declared unsuitable by the Commission at the time of viva voce test. The requirements of viva voce and psychological tests have been detailed at the conclusion of Rule 37 and are designed to assess their inherent tendencies and capabilities, their personal qualities and traits of character and .to assess their suitability for the services for which they are entered. In the instant case the petitioner was after the tests found suitable for Grade‑16 only and it was observed that "presently ill‑equipped for any Grade‑17 job." The remarks in the psychological report are that "he is too ill‑equipped yet for any Grade‑17 C. S. S. job". The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Commission had no jurisdiction to determine the suitability or otherwise of a candidate for Grade‑17 or 16 job would no prevail. The Commission had conducted a joint Competitive Examination for both the Grades and it was within its competence to determine the suitability of the candidates for either of the Grades.

5. The functions of the Commission have been detailed in section 7 of the Federal Public Service Commission Ordinance, 1977 and the Commission is to conduct tests and examinations for recruitment to All Pakistan Service, the Civil Services of the Federation and such posts in connection with the affairs of the Federation as may be prescribed by rules made under section 10 and to advise the President on matters relating to qualifications for, and methods of recruitment to, the services and posts referred to above and any other matter which the President may refer to the Commission. The term "test" has been defined in rule 2 (f) of the Federal Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1978 to include written examination, interview and viva voce. The combined results of, the tests comprising written examination, interview and viva voce is to be taken into consideration by the Commission for recommending a candidate for a particular post in Grade‑17 or 16. Notwithstanding the total marks obtained by the candidate be shall not, however, be considered for appointment to any of the Groups/posts for which he has been declared unsuitable by the Commission at the time of viva voce test as envisaged by rule 12 referred to above.

6. A similar question came up for consideration before Rawalpindi Bench of Lahore High Court but could not prevail. The petitioner Vaqar Ahmed Azeem took up the matter in Intra‑Court Appeal No. 1 of 1983 but the same was dismissed in limine on 9th October, 1983. We are of the view that since the Commission is authorised to hold joint Competitive Examination for recruitment to posts in Grades‑17 and 16 under the Federal Government it is within its competence to recommend the candi dates for posts in Grade‑17 or 16. The petitioner could not establish that the Commission had acted mala fide, arbitrarily or in violation of any provision of law or statutory rules to not recommending him for a post in Grade‑17.

In the result, we find no merit in the writ petition and would dismiss it with costs.

A. B. Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.