CSB to submit its recommendations regarding promotion of CSPs before Supreme Court | CustomNews.pk

CSB to submit its recommendations regarding promotion of CSPs before Supreme Court

KARACHI: The Central Selection Board (CSB) meetings held earlier this month to consider civil servants for promotion would present the recommendations before the Supreme Court of Pakistan reportedly on December 23, 2016. These Board meetings would also be participated by parliamentarians and senators and department representatives of all the groups. Chairman FBR Nisar Mohammad Khan chaired the CSB meetings. The suspense regarding promotions of officers would end after the recommendations are presented before the apex court. This time the proceedings and recommendations of the CSB have been kept quite secret to avoid any further litigation by the officers who were not promoted. Sources said the CSB would present it recommendations before the Supreme Court on December 23, 2016 and then the promotions would be notified to be followed by large scale transfers and postings. The Supreme Court of Pakistan in a decision dated December 01, 2016 in the constitutional appeals (CAs) pertaining to the Promotion Policy of Civil Servants advised the Establishment Division to hold central selection board (CSB) meeting within 15 days. The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) in its submission before the apex court dated November 22, 2016 had prayed to dispose of the CAs. In compliance with august Court’s directions in Orya Maqbool Abbassi’s case in order to ensure promotion of honest officers to the senior ranks in civil service, that the Federal Government issued the Office Memorandum annexing therewith an Objective Assessment Form allocating 15 marks to the Central Selection Board (CSB), including 5 marks under the head of “integrity/general reputation perception”. The said 5 marks were given overriding effect in that if an officer under consideration for promotion could not secure at least 3 out of 5 marks then he/she could be superseded or deferred but for reasons to be recorded in writing. Two central selection board (CSB) have since been held in 2014 and 20 t5 under the aforementioned criteria with specific directions to the Federal Government in Aftab Maneka’s case to hold CSB of 2015 within a short period of 30 days in accordance with the criteria already set for determining the fitness or otherwise of civil servants, which included the overriding effect of 5 marks for integrity. Federal Government held the meeting of CSB in May 2015 under the same criteria, which now forms the subject matter of present litigation. During the course of hearing of captioned CAs regarding the overriding effect of 5 marks for integrity and with a view to bringing a closure of the present long-drawn litigation delaying the holding of CSB, the Federal government is willing to do away with the overriding effect of said 5 marks for integrity by amending the Office Memorandum accordingly. Consequently, petitioners before high court eligible for consideration shall be considered afresh in the next CSB in light of the amended OM, after doing away with the overriding effect of 5 marks for integrity, as aforesaid and if promoted, shall regain their seniority with their batch considered to the CSB held in May 2015. The Establishment Division has submitted before the Supreme Court that the decision of competent authority in accepting and notifying the promotions recommended by the CSB held in May 2015 may kindly not be disturbed since the promotees were scrutinized against and passed the stricter criteria of overriding effect of 5 marks for integrity besides having been condemned unheard by the High Court. Establishment Division submits that nothing adverse may kindly be inferred or held against the Federal Government/competent authority from the insertion or removal of the aforesaid overriding effect and same may kindly be considered without prejudice to its right to determine, improve and reform the Promotion Policy of civil servants in order to ensure promotion of most fit and honest officers in civil service.
What is your view on this ? Let us know in the comments section
Ad
More