PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has turned down the plea of an associate professor against the rejection of his candidature for the post of a chemistry professor (BPS-21) at the Bacha Khan University (BKU), Charsadda, and declared the decision of the relevant selection board and university syndicate in that respect lawful.

Rejecting the petition of Dr Hussain Gulab, an associate professor of the BKU chemistry department, a bench consisting of Chief Justice Qaiser Rashid Khan and Justice Shakeel Ahmad observed that the petitioner was not only unsuccessful in the interview but also failed to obtain ‘quantification marks’ required for appointment as a professor to the university.

It added that the quantification marks and interview were designed essentially to gauge a candidate’s familiarity with the subject he or she had chosen to teach in addition to his or her ‘power of expression’.

The bench ruled that the quantification marks did not reflect the personality of a candidate or communication skills, which were left to be adjudged at the time of interview.

Declares such positions not ordinary, require well-rounded people

“The post of a university professor is not an ordinary service. The university should admit such a person in its fold, who possesses a well-rounded personality, a grasp over subject, balanced sense of conversation, maturity and good communication skills. This is for the simple reason that if a person of low intellectual quality or feeble personality is appointed as such, the entire nation as well as students would suffer,” it observed.

The petitioner had said he was working as an associate professor (BPS-20) at the BKU’s chemistry department after holding different posts in the university since Sept 2010.

He said he had participated in different conferences and training programmes and received commendation certificates, while his research papers in the relevant field were published by renowned journals.

The petitioner said on March 2, 2021, the university had invited applications for various posts, including two of chemistry professors, and being an eligible candidate, he had applied for it.

He said though he was qualified for the post, he was not recommended for appointment and instead, the selection board had called for the re-advertising of the post.

Lawyers Naveed Akhter and Mohammad Adnan Khattak represented the respondents, including the BKU, whereas assistant advocate general Sofia Noreen appeared for the provincial government.

They contended that the petitioner had not only failed in the interview but also didn’t have the requisite quantification marks.

The counsel said that the appointment of teachers to the university was governed by the Teachers Appointment and Scales of Pay Statutes, 2010, under which a candidate must secure at least 12 out of 20 marks in the interview for selection as a professor otherwise he or she should not be eligible for recommendation by the selection board.

The bench ruled that when the petitioner had competed with others for appointment as professor, he should know that he was not only to obtain requisite quantification marks but also to pass the interview, which he didn’t.

“It is by now settled that that interview is a subjective test and we cannot, in our constitutional jurisdiction, substitute our opinion for that of the interview conducted by the selection board in order to give the petitioner the desired result,” it declared.

The bench also observed that the petitioner had not been able to show it that members of the selection board were either biased or acted with mala fide intent.

Published in Dawn, March 14th, 2022