HAIDER TAJ Versus KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J .---Petitioner, Haider Taj, has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court with the following prayer in writ petition:-- "that on acceptance of this writ petition an appropriate writ may please be issued declaring the petitioner as fit and eligible for the post of Assistant Professor (BPS-18), has duly been brought in the list of proposed recommendies. The cancellation of the candidature of the petitioner dated 23.12.2013 is illegal and unlawful and without unlawful authority and thus of no legal effect, the acts and omission of the respondents in not recommending the petitioner to Govt. for appointment against the post of Assistant Professor (BPS-18) is illegal, unlawful, without lawful authority and of no legal effect, the respondents are bound to follow the law and to recommend the petitioner to the Govt. for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (BPS-18) with all consequential benefits or any other remedy deemed proper may also be allowed."

2. The facts of the case as gleaned from the record are that Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Public Service Commission/respondent No.1, advertised 20 posts of Male Assistant Professor in Commerce for Government Colleges of Commerce/Government College of management Sciences, with the following qualification:

"QUALIFICATION : (i) Ph.D in the relevant subject from a recognized University, or (ii) M.Phil/MS in the relevant subject from a recognized University, having two years teaching experience in the relevant field, or (iii) M.B.A/M.Com/BBA (Hons) in the relevant subject from a recognized University with five years experience of teaching or Business Management."

3. The petitioner also applied for one of the posts mentioned above, on the basis of following experience:--

S. No.

Name of Institute

Experience..from.. to

01

Lecturer in Institute of Management Studies University of Peshawar.

From 01.05.2008 to 28.03.2012

02

Lecturer PEF post graduate College

From 22.09.2006 to 01.05.2008

03

Lecturer Farabi Degree College, Peshawar

From (sic)01.2005 to 22.09.2006

04

Lecturer ICMS Hayatabad Peshawar

From (sic)09.2003 to (sic)9.2004

4. According to the comments of respondents, the petitioner was provisionally interviewed for the post on 20.02.2013 subject to production of experience certificate along with appointment letter duly countersigned verified from the competent authority. After selection of the petitioner, he was asked in writing by the commission to make up deficiency before conveying his recommendation to Technical Education Department, but he showed his inability on the ground that the experience was on visiting basis, therefore, the institution declined to issue the requisite appointment letter. As such, according to the respondents, on the basis of visiting experience, candidature of the petitioner was cancelled. Record would further show that on appeal of the petitioner, committee was constituted, which, after examination of case of the petitioner, recommended that 'application form was authentic/original document for eligibility of the candidate and could not be changed or erased (taken out of consideration)'. The committee observed that 'though the petitioner possessed the requisite experience but he had claimed experience different from the one he claimed earlier'. The committee concluded that 'if allowed, it will set a bad precedent for future and candidates would claim one experience in the application form and later on change their experience if so needed'. Consequently, the earlier decision of cancellation of candidature of the petitioner was upheld by the committee as well.

5. During arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner could not persuade us to arrive at a different conclusion than the one arrived at by the respondent/Public Service Commission. In order to ensure certainty, predictability and uniformity in the selection process, the Public Service Commission ought to ensure adherence to its set rules, as deviation there-from would not only result in setting wrong precedents but the edifice built on the integrity of process of selection by the Public Service Commission will also crumble down. There can be no cavil to the proposition that subsequent change in the declared experience would not only serve as a source of opening Pandora's box but could also tend to put other eligible candidates in a disadvantages position, not warranted by law and established cannons of justice.

6. In short, the petitioner could not make out a case for indulgence of this court in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

ZC/369/P Petition dismissed.