CB issues notice on CSS exemption plea
A constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the federation on a petition filed against induction of officers from armed forces in the civil bureaucracy without any written examination.
A five-member CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan took up a petition filed through Ali Azeem Afridi.
During the hearing the lawyer contended that civilian candidates desirous of joining the Central Superior Services (CSS) are mandated to sit a written exam as well as an interview. However, officers from armed forces are exempted from the written exam.
When Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, a member of the bench, asked the counsel as to which of his fundamental rights are violated by this provision, he replied that this provision was discriminatory.
The CB issued notice to the federation under Section 3 of the Civil Services Rules, 1956 and adjourned the case for three weeks.
The CSS refers to the elite civil service of Pakistan through which bureaucrats and government officers are recruited to various federal departments and ministries.
Conducted by the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC), the purpose of the CSS exam is to recruit officers for the Grade-17 posts in various federal government services. This exam includes written tests of compulsory and optional subjects, psychological assessment and a viva voce or interview.
The bench, while hearing a petition regarding the inclusion of life skills education in schools, summoned the federal and provincial education secretaries.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that the presence of all secretaries would help develop a joint strategy.
The additional attorney general informed the court that life skills education is already being taught in Islamabad's schools. Justice Mazhar emphasized that all provinces must formulate a policy in coordination with the federal government.
Salman Akram Raja pointed out that Punjab and the federal government have submitted their responses but copies have not been provided to them. The court expressed displeasure over the absence of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's representative.
The court directed that copies of all provincial responses be shared with the petitioner's counsel and adjourned the hearing for an indefinite period.
During the hearing of an appeal related to the appointment of vice-chancellors in universities, Justice Mazhar inquired whether the rector and president of Islamabad's International Islamic University had been appointed.
The lawyer responded that the rector has not been permanently appointed and currently holds an acting charge. The university's lawyer informed the court that the president of the International Islamic University has been appointed but he has not yet taken charge due to being in Saudi Arabia.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
Judicial credibility hangs in balance
Listen to article As the Supreme Court's Constitutional Bench (CB) gears up to resume hearing on review petitions against the majority verdict in the reserved seats case on Thursday, speculation is swirling about the direction of the decision and the political tremors it may unleash. Experts believe the ruling will rest on how the court chooses to read the Constitution: either with a microscope or a magnifying glass. Former additional attorney general Waqar Rana notes that the fate of the case hinges on two distinct interpretative approaches to the Constitution: a literal and pedantic reading, treating the Constitution as an ordinary statute or a liberal and organic interpretation that upholds foundational constitutional values. "It is a test of the judiciary when judging the state (Paula Newberg) whether it follows and upholds the Constitution by approaching it with the latter rules of interpretation or it follows the former rules," Rana stated. He added that from a historical perspective, the judiciary has been split into two camps: one aligned with the tradition of Justice Cornelius and the other with that of Justice Munir. "Choices are simple. The Court either follows constitutional faith or continues with idolatry of necessity. In the ultimate analysis, the faith of people in the judicial system as an independent arbiter of justice and the rule of law is at stake." The reserved seats case is pivotal in determining whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) secures 23 additional National Assembly seats, which would significantly affect the power balance in the lower house and determine whether the ruling coalition secures a two-thirds majority. To date, the judgment authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah – and endorsed by seven other judges – has not been implemented by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), despite being nearly a year old. Observers note that four judicial opinions were rendered in the case. Among them is the second opinion, authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and supported by then chief justice Qazi Faez Isa. This view, widely referred to as the "Mandokhail Formula," allows PTI some representation in the National Assembly. Should this view be endorsed by a new majority, the ruling coalition could achieve a two-thirds majority, while PTI reclaims a parliamentary presence. A senior lawyer commented that endorsement of Justice Mandokhail's view could offer a "win-win situation" for both the government and PTI: the ruling alliance gets its supermajority, and PTI regains entry into Parliament. The third opinion was penned by Justice Aminuddin Khan, head of the CB, and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan. They dismissed the Sunni Ittehad Council's (SIC) petition, upholding both the Peshawar High Court and ECP decisions, which held that reserved seats could not be allocated to SIC. Their opinion called for the redistribution of the 78 unallocated seats among all qualifying parties, especially the PML-N and PPP. Justice Amin's role as the CB's presiding judge gives his position added weight, and notably, six new judges have joined the current bench. However, none of the six judges who were part of the original bench are included in the review proceedings. Even two judges who had earlier endorsed the majority order are not publicly supporting the July 12 judgement in court. One judge, during recent hearings, even used the term "biased" to describe the original majority decisionan unprecedented move that has added further uncertainty to the case's outcome. Meanwhile, debate is growing over whether the new majority will side with Justice Amin's stance or adopt the Mandokhail formula. Legal insiders note that although two judges – Justice Ayesha Malik and Justice Aqeel Ahmad Abbasi – have already dismissed the review petitions and their votes will count in the final decision, many believe the July 12 majority judgement may not survive the ongoing review. Some pro-government legal voices claim that the 27th Constitutional Amendment is under discussion, allegedly aiming to restructure judicial authority over the long term. This has reignited debate on whether judicial independence, a core feature of the Constitution, is being preserved or compromised. Notably, petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment have yet to be scheduled by the CB, despite repeated calls from senior SC judges. Observers argue that the judges who benefited from the 26th Amendment appear less concerned about judicial independence than those who were sidelined by it. Though the government appears confident about the outcome, the bench is reportedly eager to conclude the review proceedings swiftly. PTI's counsel, Hamid Khan, has requested adjournment until August 5, citing his general adjournment, but sources suggest the court is unlikely to delay proceedings, especially with judges' summer vacations already in effect.
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Express Tribune
CB issues notice on CSS exemption plea
A constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the federation on a petition filed against induction of officers from armed forces in the civil bureaucracy without any written examination. A five-member CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan took up a petition filed through Ali Azeem Afridi. During the hearing the lawyer contended that civilian candidates desirous of joining the Central Superior Services (CSS) are mandated to sit a written exam as well as an interview. However, officers from armed forces are exempted from the written exam. When Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, a member of the bench, asked the counsel as to which of his fundamental rights are violated by this provision, he replied that this provision was discriminatory. The CB issued notice to the federation under Section 3 of the Civil Services Rules, 1956 and adjourned the case for three weeks. The CSS refers to the elite civil service of Pakistan through which bureaucrats and government officers are recruited to various federal departments and ministries. Conducted by the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC), the purpose of the CSS exam is to recruit officers for the Grade-17 posts in various federal government services. This exam includes written tests of compulsory and optional subjects, psychological assessment and a viva voce or interview. The bench, while hearing a petition regarding the inclusion of life skills education in schools, summoned the federal and provincial education secretaries. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that the presence of all secretaries would help develop a joint strategy. The additional attorney general informed the court that life skills education is already being taught in Islamabad's schools. Justice Mazhar emphasized that all provinces must formulate a policy in coordination with the federal government. Salman Akram Raja pointed out that Punjab and the federal government have submitted their responses but copies have not been provided to them. The court expressed displeasure over the absence of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's representative. The court directed that copies of all provincial responses be shared with the petitioner's counsel and adjourned the hearing for an indefinite period. During the hearing of an appeal related to the appointment of vice-chancellors in universities, Justice Mazhar inquired whether the rector and president of Islamabad's International Islamic University had been appointed. The lawyer responded that the rector has not been permanently appointed and currently holds an acting charge. The university's lawyer informed the court that the president of the International Islamic University has been appointed but he has not yet taken charge due to being in Saudi Arabia.
Express Tribune
6 days ago
- Express Tribune
SHC orders opening of Governor House for acting governor
The Constitutional Bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC), comprising Justice K.K. Agha and Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, heard Acting Governor Owais Qadir Shah's petition challenging the locking of Governor House offices. The court ordered the immediate reopening of these offices and directed the principal secretary to submit a compliance report by June 23. During the urgent hearing, the bench granted acting governor immediate access to the Sindh Governor's official residence. The court specifically ordered the unlocking of all offices (excluding private residential quarters) and restrained the principal secretary from obstructing the acting governor's access. The court also directed that a copy of the judicial order be transmitted to the President of Pakistan and the Principal Secretary of the Governor's House, Sindh. In the petition, it was averred that since assuming charge, the Acting Governor, Owais Qadir Shah, has been denied entry to the Governor's House for official duties which is a violation of Article 104 of the Constitution. Governor Kamran Tessori has been abroad since June 2. Acting Governor of Sindh, Owais Qadir Shah, informed the court that a meeting on law and order in the was scheduled for today, specifically to discuss matters related to Muharram. The home minister, secretary, IG Sindh, and other officials reached for the meeting. However, the principal secretary stated that the governor had taken the office keys with him. Owais Qadir Shah stated that this was an act of considering the Governor's House as their personal lounge. He cited the Constitution, which clearly states that in the absence of the governor, the acting governor can perform duties. Owais Qadir Shah said, he would write to the chief minister, highlighting that this was a mockery of the Constitution.
