Quote:
Originally Posted by chemguy
@Jazibroomi:
But don't you think that would be injustice to the 18th fellow in open merit list? In fact, an injustice to all below the vacated seat. Because the person below the vacated seat has right to the seat vacated, rather than some guy from quota system.
|
1- There are 17 open merit seats. And based on the principle of merit, these seats are the legal right of top 17 candidates. So it would not be any injustice to the candidate on merit 18 or below if he/she is not accommodated on All Pakistan Open Merit Seats.
2- In case if any of the top 17 candidates does not join and absolutely vacates his/her seat, then no doubt the vacated seat should be allocated to the candidate next on merit list. For example, the seat vacated by Abdullah Nayyar at merit no 3 in CSS 2010 should be transferred to candidate on Merit no 18.
3- The question is when a candidate from open merit seats is accommodated against a seat available in reserved quota, does he vacates any seat? The answer is no. You leave an open merit seat and occupy a quota seat and this is a pure, simple case of seat exchange. And that is how this situation was perceived by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its order on Civil Petition No. 941 of 2010 related to Women Quota in CSS.
Below is an excerpt of the order written by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry in the above mentioned case. This will definitely help you understand the legality of the issue.
“Problem started when she (Nergis Shazia Chaudhry, CSS 2008, Merit No. 343) was not accommodated and instead a female candidate from general/open seats preferred for DMG group on account of her higher merit, statedly, was accommodated against a seat available in similar group in reserved quota for females and in open merit seat a male candidate was accommodated. Actually it should have been other way round, such as, to recognize the higher merit of female candidate she must have been accommodated against the seat meant for dmg group in a reserved quota but at the same time the seat which, statedly, fell vacant in next available group in open merit on account of her adjustment should have been transferred to the female quota to ensure availability of 19 vacancies in order to achieve the objective of reserved quota”.
Now the question arises that if this rule, which, in legal terms, has become an “established principle of law” is applicable to women quota, then why not it is also applicable to provincial quota? Of course it is applicable and it should be applied in order to ensure that provinces do get their due quota share in addition to their participation in open merit, or in words of Chief Justice “in order to achieve the objective of reserved quota.”