2018 PLP (C (PLC(CS)N)

ABDUL RASOOL MEMON, J.

Through this petition the petitioner has challenged the results of the Committee of respondents Nos.2 to 4, whereby he has been declared "fail" for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector, of Police.

2. The facts as appearing on record, briefly stated are that in years 1994-95 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector in Police Department around 125 vacancies were advertised. Resultantly, the selection Board concerned conducted physical, written test, interviews of candidates following the issue of appointment orders. The unsuccessful candidates challenged the results before the higher Authorities, amongst them was the petitioner herein. In the year 2010, the petitioner filed C.P.No.D-1068/2010 before this Court which remained pending. Before that this Court has already disposed of C.P.No.D-871/2008 and many others, vide order dated 24.12.2008, which was challenged before Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Appeals Nos.57-K and others of 2009, decided on 02.02.2010, whereby a Committee of the three DIGs, namely M/s. Sanaullah Abbasi, Abdul Khaliq Shaikh and Bashir Ahmed Memon, was constituted with direction:

"we are inclined to dispose of all the titled appeals in terms thereof. The Committee so constituted is directed to complete the process of verification of the documents and thereafter interview the candidates for the post of ASIs and also arrange their physical test for the purpose of holding the said posts within a period of 60 days. However, the above arrangement shall only be applicable in the cases of the respondents and if there is any other petition pending before the High Court that shall be disposed of independently but the Court shall not be precluded from accepting this arrangement, if it is consented by the parties." 2. (sic) The Constitutional Petition No.D-1608/2010 filed by the petitioner along with other connected petitions were decided by this Court on 09.08.2012 with directives that:-- "The Honourable Supreme Court in its order dated 02.5.2012 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.15-K/ 2012 in paragraph No.4 of the order has observed as under : "In our opinion, as some of the batch mates of the Petitioner have been entertained by the department, then at-least the Petitioner should be given a similar chance. Consequently, we would direct the Respondents to examine the Petitioner and subject him to the same tests as those undergone by his batch mates including medical and thereafter place their report before this Court." In view of the dictum laid down by the apex Court in similar case, we hereby direct the respondents to examine the cases of the petitioners and in case they are found fit and eligible they may be considered for the said posts, otherwise submit detailed report before this Court. This exercise shall be done within three months time."

3. The aforementioned Constitutional Petition for leave to appeal being No.15-K/2012 stood decided on 02.05.2012.

4. Now the petitioner has come up with instant petition inter alia making a prayer that act of respondents to declare him fail and denying his appointment order is illegal, void, and not warranted under the law as well as against the equity and principles of natural justice and further to direct the respondents to issue appointment order to the petitioner for the post of ASI in Sindh Police with all back benefits.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance seen the documents as referred to by them. During their submissions, Mr. Safdar Ali Ghouri, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to list of petitioners containing remarks relevant to the candidates successful, failure and not entertained which bears the names of the petitioner Khan Muhammad Khoso at S.No.28 resident of District Jacobabad. Contention of the learned counsel was that observation of the Committee against the name of the petitioner at S.No.28 is that he has obtained 65 marks and in relevant column showing the result of the petitioner was shown "Fail", while many other candidates having secured lesser marks according to that list such as S.Nos.1 to 8 and others have been declared pass, hence the petitioner was on the face of it discriminated and wrongly declared fail. Learned counsel was emphatic in his submissions that gross negligence has been done to the petitioner. He requested that the prayer of the petitioner in the terms as stated in the petition be granted. Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgari, learned Addl. A.G. vehemently challenged to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the observation of the DIGs Committee as to securing 65 marks by the petitioner does not relate to the exercise undertaken by this Committee but apparently, it relates to some documents prepared in respect of some previous Exercise in the remote past; whereas the DIGs Committee on understanding the exercise in line with the direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court prepared separate list of failure and successful candidates which are relevant and the same have been made available on record. Mr. Bhurgari further added that the name of the petitioner does not find place in the list so prepared in respect of successful candidates. He referred to the relevant report results No.PS/Addl:IGP/CB/Sindh/536-545, Karachi dated 31.12.2012, and individual personal statements of all the Members (DIGs) of the Committee.

6. Having given attention to the oral submissions of the parties and on perusal of record, we consider it appropriate to reproduce the entries of S.No.28 of joint list of successful candidates referred to by learned counsel for the petitioner as attached with instant petition reflecting as under : S.No. Name Father name C.N.I.C. No. 28 Khan Muhammad Naik Muhammad 43101-3661790-7 Date of birth District Committee observation Entertained or not entertained 6/8/1973 Jacobabad He produced copy of Court order. As per record of DIGP office he appeared in written test vide S..No.123 with Roll No.52, and secured 65 Marks. However, DIGP office have directed to produce copies of his answer sheets which are available on record. Fail

7. Perusal of Committee observations reproduced above does not show that the petitioner has obtained 65 marks in the exercise doable (sic) per orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed on 02.02.2010 in Civil Appeal No.57-K/2009 and orders dated 02.05.2012 passed in C.P. No.15/2012, the relevant passage whereof has already been reproduced in paragraph 2 (supra). Undeniably direction to the Committee were that to complete personal verification of documents, thereafter interviews of the candidates for the post of ASIs, physical test for the purpose of holding the said post was to be completed within 60 days. Whereas entries at S.No.28 do not relate to the result of interviews and physical test for the purpose of holding by said post. Admittedly the report of the Committee dated 31.12.2012, duly signed by three DIGs (Members of the Committee) shows that the interviews were held on 24.10.2012, documents were examined and verified, physical test was conducted whereas Committee's observation reflects its relevance to some written test showing 65 marks obtained by the petitioner vide S.No.123 with Roll No.52 available in DIGs office as was seemingly examined document earlier prepared and produced before the Committee. Be that as it may, we have seen separate list of successful and failures prepared by the Committee and name of the petitioner is in the list of failure candidates and not successful candidates. We have also seen the written statement of three DIGs, the relevant passages from the same are reproduced as under (i) Mr. Bashir Ahmed Memon, Addl. IGP, C.B Karachi (Chairman) That in compliance of directives of this Hon'ble Court, the petitioner was called to appear before the committee, on Wednesday i.e. 24.10.2012, at 0900 hours, at PTS, Larkana, for processing/examining his case for the post of ASI, vide letter No. PS/Addl.IGP/CB/Sindh/414 dated 17.10.20.12. He appeared before the committee and was interviewed for the said post. After interview, committee unanimously declared him fail and his case was not entertained along with 31 candidates. Such committee report was submitted before this Hon'ble Court, vide No. PS/Addl.IGP/CB/ Sindh/ 536-545 dated 31.12.2012 (ii) Mr. Sanaullah Abbasi, DIGP Hyderabad (Member) "

2. That in pursuance of Honourable Supreme Court order dated 03.03.2010, a committee was constituted by PPO/ IGP, Sindh Karachi vide order No.AIGP/OPS-2923-28/2010 Karachi dated 01-04-2010, under the Chairmanship of Mr. Bashir Ahmed Memon PPM, PSP, Commandant DIGP, SRP and Security Sindh Karachi, in which the undersigned was nominated as a member.

3. That all the record of this matter was kept in the office of DIGP, SRP and Security Sindh Karachi (Chairman of the Committee)." (iii) Mr. Abdul Khaliq Shaikh, DIGP Larkana (Member) That, after scrutinizing the record, the candidate namely Khan Muhammad Khoso declared fail.

8. Thus having discussed the matter in forgoing paragraphs, we are of the clear view that instant petition merits no consideration and it is accordingly dismissed. HBT/K-8/Sindh Petition dismissed.