SPSC official found guilty of misconduct
By Habib Khan Ghori
KARACHI, March 15: The Sindh High Court, in its enquiry report into allegations of malpractice committed in the selection of deputy district attorneys, has found the then controller of examinations of the Sindh Public Service Commission, Umer Zaur, guilty of misconduct, while it has absolved SPSC chairman Hassan Bhutto and member Abdul Ghafoor Junejo.
The report was prepared by Justice Faisal Arab, who was entrusted with the enquiry into the allegations against the SPSC chairman vide notification Feb 10, 2007. The report was placed before the Sindh Assembly on March 12 in response to a question asked by Nadeem Ahmed Bhutto.
In 2004, the law department of the Sindh government placed a requisition with the commission for selecting 23 persons for appointment to the post of deputy district attorney in BPS-17.
The candidates were required to first appear in written competitive examinations and the candidates qualifying in the said examinations were then to be called for viva voce.
Justice Arab had issued notices to the SPSC chairman M.H. Bhutto, member of the selection committee Junejo and ex-controller of examinations Zaur to state their respective positions in writing with regard to the selection of deputy district attor neys who were called for viva voce despite failing their written tests.
According to the procedure notified by the commission on Dec 7, 2005, in cases where the number of candidates is more than three for each post, a maximum of three candidates for each post are to be selected from amongst the candidates who have appeared in the written competitive examinations.
As such, against 23 posts, 69 candidates were required to be selected for viva voce from amongst the aspirants who scored the highest marks in the written test.
In response to an advertisement, which was placed in newspapers by the commission, 641 applications were received and after scrutiny 435 were found in order. These candidates were then called in for the written test on Dec 22, 2005.
Out of the 435 candidates, only 404 appeared for the written test. Retired Rear Admiral S.A. Baqar, who was one of the members of the commission, was assigned to act as the examiner of the written test.
He then submitted the list containing the coded numbers of answer sheets and the marks for all 404 candidates to the controller of examinations, who determined that a minimum of 47 marks were required to qualify for the viva voce. Sixty-nine candidates hence qualified for the oral test.
Mr Zaur then prepared a draft press release with the names of 70 candidates on Jan 28, 2006, without specifying the marks each candidate had secured, for the approval of the chairman. In the press release the following 25 candidates, who had scored less than 47 marks, were called for vi va voce (the number of marks they scored is indicated in brackets): Aziz-ur-Rehman Shaikh (10), Ms Farhat Naz (36), Iqbal Ahmad Solangi (25), Jamil Hyder (3), Mrs Naheed Khan Pathan (30), Naveed Akhtar Bhatti (28), Nazir Ahmad Memon (39), Raju Hanjan (27), Farrukh Raza Baig (41), Mohammad Kamil Khan (46), S.M. Zafar Ali Wahidi (17), Nadeem Ahmad (35), Saeed Ahmad Memon (33), Ms Shahana Parveen (35), Suresh Kumar Parmani (23), Arshad Mobeen Pathan (27), Atif Ilyas (46), Danish Zahir Syed (16), Syed Julye Zaidy (39) Khalid Mehmood Rajput (29), Mohammad Ayub Brohi (30), Nisar Ahmad Morio (40), Zahid Ali Chachar (15), Abdul Hafeez Jatoi (3) and Abdullah Malik (36). The 70 short-listed candidates were then interviewed by a three member committee, which chose 25 candidates for appointment. Of those, seven had scored less than 47 marks in the written test.
After this, the selection process was alleged to be tainted. Pursuant to the allegation, the records was scrutinised, and this scrutiny indicated that Mr Zaur had prepared his own list, and had awarded extra marks to 25 candidates.
In his first response, Mr Zaur alleged that the list with the exaggerated marks had been fabricated to involve him in false charges. However, the handwriting of the figures on the list tallied with another list admittedly prepared by Mr Zaur, one which related to assistant protocol officers.
When SPSC chairman Bhutto was asked whether he verified the selection of candidates mentioned in the draft press release with the examiner’s award list in order to check any accidental er ror or intentional manipulation, he answered in the negative and submitted that as chairman, he was continuously occupied with the work of interviewing candidates.
He said that it was because of this that in 1991, vide a Jan 19, 1991, notification issued by the then chairman M.A. Kazi, the controller of examinations was made exclusively responsible for tabulation and announcement of the results of the written test. Member Abdul Ghafoor Junejo also said selection of eligible candidates for viva voce was the exclusive responsibility of the controller. Report’s recommendations In his report, Justice Arab recommends that in order to prevent such scams in the future, the controller of examinations should prepare a list under his or her signature after receipt of result sheets from the examiner containing coded numbers and marks secured by all the candidates in the written test. The list should contain both coded and original roll numbers of each candidate selected for viva voce and the minimum qualifying marks.
The chairman or any other members of the commission should cross-check the list prepared by the controller with the examiner’s award list to avoid intentional manipulation or omissions in the selection of qualified candidates.
Copies of the examiner’s award list and the list of candidates qualified in the written test shall at all times be made available for inspection by any candidate for the sake of transparency, Justice Arab’s report adds.
http://epaper.dawn.com/ArticleText.a...3_2009_113_006