ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the medical officers and the public servants in the provincial management services (PMS) who appeared in the 2018 Combined Competitive Examination (CCE) of the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) and completed required training after their selection in Grades 16 and above will continue to serve in their respective jobs.

On June 3, 2021, the Hyderabad circuit bench of the Sindh High Court had suspended the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) Act, 1989, in its present form declaring it ultra vires to the Constitution, and cancelled job test results of medical officers and CCE held in 2018.

A three-judge Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel and Justice Ayesha Malik held that officers who passed their written examinations but could not be appointed due to alleged irregularities, will be considered and adjusted in the existing available or future vacancies whenever they accrue. But in the meanwhile SPSC will also condone if some candidates become overage in the wait.

The Supreme Court had taken up a set of appeals moved by the Sindh government as well as individual petitioners against the June 3, 2021 SHC judgement declaring the SPSC Act 1989, SPSC (Functions) Rules, 1990 and SPSC (Appointment of Chairman and Members) Rules 2017 against the Constitution.

Court rules PMS, medical officers appointed through 2018 competitive exam will continue to serve

On Tuesday, the apex court ruled that the SHC order regarding declaring the SPSC Act of 1989 had become infructous since the provincial government had subsequently promulgated the SPSC Act.

After declaring the SPSC Act 1989 ultra vires to the Constitution, the SHC had also set aside the job and test results of medical officers and CCE held in 2018. As a result of the SHC verdict, the recruitment of around 1,700 male and female medical and other government officers got affected.

Senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan represented certain officers of the PMS as well as Salahuddin Ahmed appeared on behalf of the medical officers.

In one of the petitions filed by Makhdoom Ali Khan on behalf of a number of provincial officers, the petitioners pleaded that they were condemned unheard since they were not parties to the proceedings before the SHC. Even no notices were ever issued to them or any opportunity of hearing was provided to them before the judgement was passed. As the results of CCE-2018 were set aside and cancelled without any discussion in the high court order, the petitioners pleaded that the high court’s verdict was based on the assumption that candidates were selected through CCE-2018 without a written test.

“This is incorrect and contrary to the record,” the petitioners contended, adding that they were selected through a transparent and lengthy process that included application, screening test, written tests or interview.

Upon selection by the SPSC, the petitioners said they were issued offer letters by the Sindh government on Jan 30, 2020, which were accepted by them.

Later, they underwent medical examination and their character antecedents and educational testimonials were also verified, the petition said, adding that the high court’s verdict did not take into consideration that CSS examinations were conducted by the Federal Public Service Commission in the same manner as CCE-2018. This is apparent from the Rules for Competitive Examination (CSS), 2017 framed by FPSC.

The petition pleaded that the high court went beyond the prayer of the earlier petitioners, who had challenged the interview process of the SPSC for selection of women medical officers in BS-17.

That selection process was distinct from CCE-2018 — through which the petitioners were selected. The SHC, however, without any basis set aside and cancelled the results of CCE-2018.

There was not an iota of evidence before the SHC regarding irregularity in the selection process of CCE-2018, besides the judgement was based on conjectures and assumptions and the high court’s judgement decided disputed questions of fact when it was a settled law that the high courts, in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction, could not decide factual controversies.

The high court’s judgement was passed without taking into consideration the vested rights and legitimate expectation of the petitioners, the petitioners alleged.

The petitioners were highly qualified individuals, who participated in the lengthy process of CCE-2018 before being declared successful. “They have not only been posted in different government departments since their appointment but have also been undergoing training even some of them resigned from their previous jobs in order to participate in CCE-2018.”

The petitioners also pleaded that the high court’s order was passed the judgement in suo motu exercise of powers as none of the petitioners before the SHC challenged the validity of the 1989 Act, or the 2017 rules, the petitioners said.

Published in Dawn, September 7th, 2022