SHABBIR HUSSAIN vs EXECUTIVE DISTRICT OFFICER (EDUCATION), LARKANA

' FAISAL ARAB, J.--- In order to implement its education Program in the government schools of Sindh, the Provincial Government devised a recruitment policy on 10-7-2008 for selection and appointment of primary, junior and secondary school teachers. This recruitment policy was framed keeping in view the guidelines laid down by the World Bank which had provided a credit facility of three hundred million US Dollars to finance the program.

2. The petitioners of all these petitions are unsuccessful candidates who though applied for the posts of teachers but were not appointed. Most of them have called in question the selection criteria. Their grievance is that in the advertisement inviting applications for appointment of teachers, criterion for declaring a candidate successful was laid down which was not followed when the merit lists were prepared. Some of the petitioners have complained about the manipulations that were committed either by the District Co-Ordination Officers or by the District Recruitment Committees in the compilation of the merit-lists. Yet some have the grievance that fake degrees and certificates of academic and professional qualifications of certain candidates were accepted which deprived them their legitimate right to be appointed as teachers and in their place undeserving persons have been appointed, which wrong they seek to be undone by this Court.

3. In this background of the controversy, it would be worthwhile to first examine the selection criterion laid down in the Recruitment Policy dated 10-7-2008.

4. Under the Recruitment Policy dated 10-7-2008, the selection of candidates for appointment as primary, junior and secondary school teachers was to be made on the basis of preparation of Union Council specific merit-list. The selection criterion was based on five factors: (a) marks obtained by a candidate in the written test; (b) the points .Scored for academic qualifications; (c) the points scored for professional qualifications; (d) points awarded on account of being a female gender; and (e) the place of domicile. Each of these five factors was to be assigned certain weight.

Thus the merit-list was to be prepared on the basis of the aggregate of the marks and points which a candidate has Obtained for each .Of the above mentioned five factors provided under the recruitment policy.

5. The learned counsel for many of the petitioners argued that in the advertisement through which applications were invited, the only criteria that was to be applied was the procurement of more than 60% marks in the. Written test and, therefore, a candidate who had obtained more marks in the written test than the other deserves to be appointed over the candidate who has obtained less marks and the points awarded for academic or professional qualifications or other factors ought not to have been taken, into consideration while selecting a candidate for appointment. We shall first examine the selection criterion as laid down in the recruitment policy. The relevant portion of it, for convenience sake, is summarized as follows:--- I. Qualifying Marks in written test.

' A candidate must first obtain a minimum of 60% marks in the written test in order to be considered for selection; II. Points for Academic Qualifications.

' After a candidate had obtained a minimum of 60 marks in the written test, he was to be given additional points for his or her academic qualifications. 15 points were to be given if the candidate holds Master's Degree in Science, Arts or Commerce or 12 points if the candidate holds Bachelor's Degree in Science, Arts or Commerce or 10 points if the candidate is a FA/FSc. Or 8 points if a female candidate is only a matriculate. Points for matriculation were to be given for the reason that where minimum qualification for a post is Intermediate and Intermediate female candidates are not available, then those female candidates, who are only matriculate also became eligible to apply for such post; ' While awarding points on the basis of academic qualifications, the points, awarded for highest qualification which a candidate holds were only to be counted and not the aggregate of all academic qualifications. .The points for academic qualifications were subject to verification of the degrees/Certificates issued only by recognized Institutions, Boards and Universities.

III. Points for Professional Qualifications.

' Apart from marks obtained in written test and points scored for academic qualification a candidate was to be given further additional points in case he or she possesses professional qualification also. 8 points were to be given if the candidate has done Primary Teaching Course

(PTC) or 10 points if a candidate has done Course of Teaching (CT) or 12 points if the candidate possesses degree of B. Ed. Or 15 points if the candidate carries degree of M.Ed.; ' While awarding points on the basis of professional qualifications, the points, awarded for highest qualification which a candidate holds were only to be counted and not the aggregate of all academic qualifications. The points for academic qualifications were subject to verification of the degrees/Certificates issued only by recognized Institutions, Boards and Universities.

IV. Additional Points on the basis of place of domicile, Additional 30 points were to be given if the candidate is from the same Union Council where School to which appointment is to be made is located or ' 25 points if the candidate is not from the same Union Council but is from the Taluka in which the School is located or 20 points if the candidate is not from the same Union Council or Taluka but is from the same District in which the School is located.

' For such purpose, the candidate had to provide a certificate of the Secretary of the Union Council to the effect that he or she is resident of a particular Union Council and Taluka.

V. Additional Points on the basis of gender.

' Then apart from the points secured under the above mentioned heads, 20 additional points were to be given if the candidate is a female.

6. From the above discussed selection criterion it is evident that in order to be declared successful, the first step for a candidate was to clear the written test by securing minimum of 60% marks. Thus 60% marks was the minimum thrashhold for passing the written test only. Once a candidate achieves this, then the second step of evaluating his or her other qualification was to start i,e, award of points for academic and professional qualification and also on the basis of place of domicile and gender. After completion of all these steps, the process of verification of certificates or decrees of the academic and professional qualifications was to start. Upon completion of all these steps, the merit-list was to be prepared. Thus the merit-lists were to contain the aggregate of the marks obtained in the written test and the points awarded to the candidates on the basis of their duly verified academic, professional qualification and the place of their domicile and gender.

When the Recruitment Policy dated 10-7-2008 is examined in its totality, it becomes evident that the marks awarded in the written test were not the only criteria for compilation of the merit-lists.

For example a candidate may have obtained 62% marks in the written test as against a candidate who has obtained only 60% marks but if the latter had secured more points under other factors such as academic and professional qualifications with the result that his or her aggregate marks and points are higher than the others then such candidate is to be listed above on the merit list over the candidates who has obtained less aggregate of marks and points until all seats in terms of the criteria laid down in the Recruitment Policy, 2008 are filled in. Under the scheme of Recruitment Policy, 2008 the marks awarded for .Written test are only qualifying marks on the basis of which a candidate qualifies to be considered for selection. The actual selection and placement on the merit-list depends on the aggregate of the marks and the points that a candidate has obtained. In other words it is the cumulative of the all marks and the points which becomes basis for preparation of the merit-list and not merely the marks obtained in the written test. Thus to achieve 60% or above marks in the written test was not the only but was one of the several factors in a comprehensive selection process.

7. As regards the merits of laying down criteria for the selection process it may be mentioned here that an employer has every right to fix minimum criteria for selecting an employee. If selection process, apart from award of marks in the written test, also gives certain weight to a candidate's academic and professional qualifications as well as the place of domicile then the selection process cannot be said to be unfair merely because in the advertisement the entire selection criterion was not disclosed. As long as process of selection is transparent, fair and based on reasonable classification, the Court cannot compel an employer not to apply its recruitment policy merely because it was not published in its entirety in the advertisement through which applications were invited.

8. Hence, we are of the view that those candidates, whose aggregate is not sufficient so as to list them under the recruitment policy as successful candidates against any available vacant seat, then such candidates cannot claim the right to be appointed though he or she may have obtained 60% qualifying marks or more in the written test. In case any unsuccessful candidate is still interested to have a career in teaching, then he or she has to wait till vacancies are again advertised by the Education Department, he shall be free to apply again and compete with those who would be applying against future vacancies.

9. After conducting the exercise as discussed above, wherever required, fresh merit-list is to be prepared on the basis of the aggregate of the marks and the points, which a candidate has obtained for each of the five factors provided under the Recruitment Policy, 2008. The candidate, whose aggregate is the highest, is to be listed first on the merit list and then the second highest procurer or aggregate marks and points and so on until all the seats, advertised for appointments for a particular School/Union Council, are filled in terms of the criteria, laid down in the Recruitment Policy, 2008.

10. We shall now proceed to examine irregularities which may have deprived, an otherwise successful candidate, his or her right of appointment.

11. In cases where(?) candidates of some other Union Councils were appointed though candidates from the same Union Counsils were available for selection on merits then the services of wrongly appointed candidates have to be terminated in order to clear way for appointment of deserving candidates. The dispute as to which candidate belonged to which Union Council is to be first thoroughly scrutinized by the District Recruitment Committee. In cases where it is alleged that certificate of residence issued by the Secretary, Union Council is fake or has been obtained on the basis of false information, the concerned District Recruitment Committee shall examine this aspect and get a claim verified on the basis of irrefutable documentary record.

12. In cases where seat number of a successful candidate has been wrongly allotted to some other person who otherwise did not qualify for appointment then the concerned District Recruitment Committee shall examine this on the basis of relevant documents after giving due notice to the person who is to be adversely affected and if it was found that seat number of a candidate was given to other candidate while preparing merit-list then the services of wrongly appointed person are to be terminated.

13. The last date for submission of application in the advertisement was 25-10-2008. Candidates whose age on this date was Within the prescribed age limits and were otherwise qualified on merits to be appointed, have to be considered for appointment, regardless of the fact that they subsequently crossed the maximum age limit. They shall be appointed in place of person who has been wrongly appointed in place of a deserving candidate.

14. All discrepancies and mistakes with regard to the particulars of a candidate made at the time of processing his applications or at the time of compiling the merit-lists have to be re-examined by the concerned District Recruitment Committee upon an application being made in this behalf by any of the petitioners of all these connected petitions and if any mistake-is-detected shall be rectified after due verification. All persons appointed on wrong wrong or fabricated-particulars or by mistake have to be replaced with a person who deserves to be appointed.

15. It is alleged that some of the candidates have been awarded points on the basis of fake degrees or certificates of academic or professional qualification. The EDO, Education, in his para- wise comments has stated that in all cases where fake degrees or certificates of academic or professional qualifications have been alleged the same shall be sent to the Institutions or the Universities, as the case may be, for verification and if found bogus, appropriate criminal action shall be taken. The Recruitment Policy clearly provides that points for academic and .Professional qualifications are to be given only on the basis of duly verifiable degrees/certificates, awarded by recognized Institutions and Universities. Hence, upon due verification, if the degree or certificate of any appointee/candidate is found to be fake, the concerned authority shall summarily remove such person from service after serving due show- cause notice to him or her apart from initiating criminal action to which he or she is liable under the law. The removed person shall then be replaced by a candidate who is next in line to be appointed on the merit-list. Where a candidate has challenged academic or professional qualification of any candidate to be fake or bogus, then he shall also be entitled to seek verification directly from the concerned institution, board or university and the concerned institution, board or university shall issue certificate of verification directly to him on payment of the normal fee if any. In today's age of information technology all recognized institutions, boards and universities should place on their website all necessary information of their students who have successfully obtained certificates and/or degrees so as to make it convenient for all concerned to first immediately get the requisite information verified on the internet before going into the botheration of seeking verification from the boards, universities and institutions. The freedom of information as mandated by Article 19A of the Constitution also gives right to every citizen of Pakistan to have access to information in all matters of public importance. What could be more important in the eyes of the general public than the quality of teachers imparting education to the future generation of this country?

16. When merit-lists are revised on the basis of the aggregate of the marks and the points and on the basis of other factors as discussed in this judgment and it is found that an undeserving candidate was declared successful earlier, in place of a deserving candidate, then the wrongly appointed person has to be de-notified after due notice to him or her and replaced with a deserving candidate.

17. We are therefore of the considered view that the criterion for selection and appointment, provided under Recruitment Policy dated 10-7-2008 is fair, just and reasonable. Any selection or appointment made in violation of the criteria, laid down in the said policy or the findings given in this decision are hereby declared to be unlawful and of no legal effect. The concerned District Recruitment Committees shall strictly follow the procedure, laid down in the Recruitment Policy dated 10-7-2008 as interpreted in this judgment and shall also apply other findings given in this judgment and prepare revised merit-lists within 60 days from the date of this order. Thereafter, any candidate who has become eligible for appointment shall be appropriately listed therein and all appointments made contrary thereto have to be nullified. While preparing merit lists, the person who is likely to be affected shall be afforded the right of hearing. In case upon due notice he does not come forward to defend his position, then the committee shall proceed ex parte and decide objection of any of the petitioners expeditiously within prescribed period of sixty days.

18. All these petitions are disposed of in terms of the directions contained hereinabove.