KARACHI: Offer letters issued to 741 lecturers by mistake, SHC told
KARACHI, Jan 19: The selection of 741 lecturers by an improperly-constituted Sindh Public Service Commission in 2006 was flawed and the offer letters were issued to them in June 2008 by mistake, the Sindh High Court was informed on behalf of the chief minister on Monday.
A rejoinder submitted by Assistant Advocate-General Adnan Karim Memon after seeking instructions said the chief minister was fully empowered to accept or reject the commission’s recommendation without assigning any reason under Section 7 of the SPSC Act.
In the lecturers’ case, however, the CM scrutinised the record and found many discrepancies “in result making and mark sheets”. Besides, SHC Justice Faisal Arab, who conducted an inquiry into the selection of district and deputy district attorneys by the SPSC, also detected several defects in the selection procedure. The matter was discussed by the provincial cabinet and it decided that the SPSC recommendations in respect of the over 740 successful candidates should be rejected, the CM said in the statement submitted on his behalf.
The CM said the cabinet also decided to withdraw the offer letters issued by the government in June 2008 by mistake. The decision to accept the recommendations was taken by the caretaker government in Nov 2007-February 2008 without any mandate to decide long-term policy matters. The caretakers should have confined themselves to day-to-day affairs of the government and arrangements to hold free and fair elections. Accordingly, the CM said, the provincial cabinet asked the education department to withdraw the requisition made by it in 2005 and make a fresh requisition to the reconstituted SPSC. The candidates recommended earlier would be free to be reconsidered without applying afresh, the CM said.
Representing the petitioner lecturers, Advocates Shua-un-Nabi and Zamir Ghumro submitted in the petitions and in their arguments that the candidates were duly selected by a legally and validly constituted service commission. The caretakers had nothing to do with their selection. They appeared in the written and viva voce examinations in 2006 and were finally selected in 2007 after clearing police inquiry and medical test. They were not to blame if the SPSC was not properly constituted. They passed through a lengthy and cumbersome procedure to earn a vested right to employment.
The counsel said the offer letters were issued by the present government headed by the respondent chief minister in June 2008. They could not be deprived of a precious vested right on the pretext of a ‘mistake’. They argued that neither the requisition and SPSC advertisement of 2005 nor their tests and interviews in 2006 nor their selection in 2007 nor the offer letters could be withdrawn. Many of the candidates might have exceeded the prescribed age-limit. The petition had not been rendered infructuous by the CM’s reply, they contended.The bench put off hearing to Jan 29 to decide whether the petitioners should file a new petition to challenge the new requisition.
Sugar mill sale
The bench allowed AAG Adnan Karim Memon to obtain the chief minister’s decision on a proposal made by M/s Suraj Enterprises to increase their bid of Rs175 million for Thatta Sugar Mill to the minimum reserve price of Rs235 million. The mill, hitherto run by the Sindh Sugar Corporation, went under liquidation by the SHC official assignee. The assignee advertised the sale and received the bid of Rs175 million from M/s Suraj Enterprises. He rejected the bid when the bidder refused to raise his bid to the minimum reserve price of Rs235 million.
The bidder challenged the assignee’s rejection of its bid in the high court. In the course of proceedings, the bidder, however, offered to raise the bid amount to the requisite level and deposited Rs10 million as earnest money. He also proposed to pay another Rs60 million within 10 days and furnish bank guarantees for the balance to the satisfaction of the official assignee. The guarantees would be encashable after the expiry of three months from the date of acceptance of his proposal.
The AAG told the bench that he could only communicate the proposal to the chief minister, who is to take a final decision in his capacity as the chief executive of the province. The bench gave the law officer two weeks to seek instructions from the CM and adjourned further hearing.