ABDULLAH BALOCH, J. --- This common judgment disposes of C.P. 328 of 2018 filed by the petitioners Azmatullah son of Muhammad Siddique and Zahoor-ul-Haq son of Zia-ul-Haq and C.P. No. 213 of 2018 filed by the petitioner Iftikhar Ahmed son of Abdul Jalil, as not only common question of law and, facts are involved in both the petitions, but also the grievances of the petitioners are same.
2. Facts of the case are that the Registrar University of Balochistan, Quetta through a publication in daily newspaper invited applications for recruitment on different categories of posts including the post of Lecturer BPS- 18 (Zoology), the requisite qualification was M.Sc. (Zoology). The last date for submission of applications was 15th April, 2014. All the petitioners have submitted their credentials, besides certain private respondents have also submitted their applications, tests of eligible candidates were conducted through National Testing Service (NTS) on 30th December , 2017 and the list of successful candidate was issued, accordingly the petitioner Iftikhar Ahmed secured highest marks of 76%, while the petitioner Azmatullah secured 69% and the petitioner Zahoor-ul-Haq secured 66% marks, whereas the percentages of all private respondents were less than the percentages of marks obtained by the petitioners, but the official respondents in order to accommod ate their favourable candidates constituted a so-called Selection Board, the committee was lacking the important members i.e. Hon'ble Chief Justice of High Court of Balochistan, Subject Specialist of the relevant field and Chairman/Member of the Balochistan Public Service Commission, the Selection Board conducted the interviews and displayed a merit list of the successful candidates, wherein. the private respondents were declared as successful and recommended for appointment.
3. Parawise comments have been filed by the official respondents, wherein the allegations of the petitioners were refuted and it was asserted that those candidates, who had secured 50% marks in NTS were called for interviews, while the NTS test is for screening only and its marks were not included in the overall marks/scores obtained in the interviews, while the success of a candidate depends upon his overall performance in interview .
4. The private respondents have filed their counter-af fidavits and also refuted the allegations of the petitioners and affirmed that the Selection Committee/Board was constituted under Section 18 of the University of Balochistan Act, 1996 (Balochistan Act No. III of 1996) ("UoB Act"), the Committee after conducting the interviews of qualifying candidates, submitted the matter before the Syndicate, hence. on such basis of same the Registrar UoB issued the appointment orders of the private respondents, as such, no illegality or irregularity was committed by the Selection Board in selection of the private respondents.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners contended that the screening test conducted by the NTS is a process through which analysis of a candidate is made to check his knowledge, ability , 'capability of a candidate over his subject, as all the questions are asked from the conc erned subjects, while to the contrary the interview only relates to personal appearance of a candidate and his general knowledge about the' happenings of the world, thus the interview can never be the substitute of a screening test, but the official respondents used such tool of interview to technically knock out the eligible and qualified candidates and to accommodate their favourab le candidates; that the petitioner Iftikhar is Gold Medalist in the subject of Zoology and he had secured highest mark s in NTS test i.e. 76%, while the remaining petitioners had also obtained highest marks in NTS than the private respondents, but in order to accommodate the private respondents an illegal Selection Board was constituted , which is lacking the important members i.e. Hon'ble Chief Justice of High Court of Balochistan, Subject Specialist of the relevant field/subject and Chairman/Member of the Balochistan Public Service Commission, thus under peculiar circumstances of the case the Selection Board cannot term to be a legal Selection Board to override upon the merit list issued by the NTS. It has further been contended that legally out of total 100% marks, about 80% marks are meant for screening test, while only 20% marks are for viva-voce or interviews, but the so-called Selection Board in total disregard of such criteria recommended for appointment to the private respondents, which is highly uncalled for .
6. On the other hand the learned counsel appearing on behalf of private respondents has strongly refuted the contentions so raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and contended that highest marks in NTS is no criteria for appointment of a candidate rather it is the job of the Selection Board to minutely scrutinize the personal appearance of a candidate coupled with his general knowledge and his ability or capability over his subject and such criteria is also adopted even in the competitive examinations of CSS and PCS; that the Selection Board was constituted in accordance with UoB Act and on the basis of recommendations of such Board the private respondents were appointed in the UoB in accordance with law .
7. Learned counsel for official respondents and learned Additional A.G. also adopted the above arguments of the learned counsel for private respondents and contended that all the appointments were made on the, post in question on merit and in accordance with law by adopting all legal and codal formalities, thus prayed for dismissal of petitions.
8. Heard the learned counsel for parties and perused. The record with their valuable assistance. The petitioners mainly questioned the appointments of private respondents on two grounds i.e. the petitioners have secured highest marks in the test conducted by the NTS and the Selection Board was lacking the important members, recommended the private respondents in sheer violation of law. In support of their contentions they have relied upon the list prepared by the NTS pursuant to test held on 20th & 21st February , 2015, whereby the petitioner Iftikhar Ahmed secured 76 marks, petitioner Azmat Ullah secured 69 marks and Zahoor-ul-Haq obtained 66 marks.
Though the petitioners have obtained highest marks amongst all the contesting candidates, but however , they have failed to succeed in the interviews conducted by the Selection Board. The overall result of test and interviews were called from the University of Balochistan, bare perusal whereof reflects that each and every Member of Selection Board awarded marks to each candidate and in the overall result the private respondents have been selected by obtaining highest marks, the record furthe r reflects that thereafter the Selection Board placed its recommendations before the Syndicate for approval and after proper approval of Syndicate in its meeting held on 28th February , 2018, the competent authority (Vice-Chancellor UoB) issued the proper appointment letters of the private respondents. In this regard, the petitioners have failed to bring any iota of evidence that the Selection Board and the Syndicate committed any illegality or irregularity while exercising their powers, as such, the first objection of the petitioners does not sustain.
9. The next objection of the petitioners was that the Selection Board was not consisting upon the important numbers of Selection Board as per Section 18 of the UoB Act. We have also perused the Section 18 and the Appendix 6 of the UoB Act, which is reproduced as under:--- "6. Selection Board .
(1) The Selection Board shall consist of---
(i) The V ice-Chancellor (Chairman);
(ii) The Chairman or a member of the Balochistan Public Service Commission to be nominated by the Chairman; (iii)The Dean of the Faculty concerned;
(iv) The Chairman of the Teaching Department concerned; and
(v) One member of the Syndicate and two other men of eminence, to be appointed by the Syndicate, provided that neither of three are employees of the University .
(2) The members mentioned in sub-clause (v) of clause (1) shall hold of fice for two years.
(3) (a) Four members shall form the quorum for the Selection of a Professor or an Associate Professor and three members for the Selection of other Teachers.
(b) In case of Of ficers other than teachers, the Selection Board shall consist only of members at sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (v) of clause (1).
(4) No member who is a candidate for the post to which appointment is to be made shall take part in the proceedings of the Board.
(5) In selecting candidates for the posts of Professor and Associate Professors, the Selection Board shall co-opt or consult three experts in the subject concerned and in selecting candidates for other teaching posts, two expert in the subject concerned to be nominated by the V ice-Chancellor from standing list of expert for each subject approved by the Syndicate on the recommendation of the Selection Board and revised from time to time."
Perusal of sub-clause (3a) above provisions make it very clear that quorum of four members are required for selection of Professor or an Associate Professor and quorum of three members are required for selection of teachers and others. Taking into consideration the above provision of law the Selection Board for the purpose of selection of teachers other than the Professors and Associate Professors shall consist upon at least three members amongst the members of Selection Board , whereas the Selection Board conducted the interviews of the contesting candidates of Lecturers BPS-18 in Zoology Department held on 13th December , 2017 was comprised on the following seven members:--- Prof. Dr: Rehana Mushtaq Chairperson, Department of Zoology University of Balochistan, Quetta.
Dr. Waheed Noor Member TTS Committee University of Balochistan, Quetta.
Prof. Dr . Mudassir Asrar Dean, Faculty of Life Science University of Balochistan.
Prof. Dr . Nadeem Malik Dean, Faculty of Business, Management Science and IT University of Balochistan Prof. Dr . Abdul Ali Achakzai, Dean, Faculty of Education and Humanities, UoB Major (R) Muhammad Asif Mengal Former Provincial Secretary Mr. Bashir Baloch, Member Balochistan Public Service Commission.
10. While as per law the minimum number of Selection Board for appointment of teachers was three members and the relevant required three members i.e. (i) Professor Dr. Rehana Mushtaq, Chairperson of the Zoology Department; (ii) Major (Rtd.) Asif Menga l, one of the members of the Syndicate and (iii) Mr. Bashir Balochistan Member of Balochistan Public Service Commission were also members of Selection Board, conducted the interviews as per requirement of sub-c lause (3a) of Appendix 6. While confronted, the learned counsel for petitioners have frankly conceded the above facts and failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the constitution of Selection Board, as such, the objection having no force is rejected.
11. In view of the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the tests and interviews have been conducted by a competent forum and thereafter the appointments of the private respondents have been made in accordance with law on the recommendations of Selection Board and the Syndicate of the University of Balochistan, as such, no illegality or irregularity has been found in the selection and appointments of Lecturers (BPS-18) Zoology .
For the above reasons, the petitions being devoid of merits are hereby dismissed, with no orders as to costs.