Hiring process goes on at BKU amid alleged violation of rules

PESHAWAR: The selection process for different administrative and teaching positions continues at the Bacha Khan University, Charsadda, amid allegations of violations of rules, nepotism and gross irregularities.

A nominee of the Higher Education Department in the selection board has raised serious questions over the legality of the composition of the selection board, award of qualification/experience marks by scrutiny and quantification committee and favouritism in the accumulative marks to the aspirants for different positions.

In his formal letter to the registrar of the university, a copy of which is available with The News, the official expressed dissent over the composition of the selection board for the administrative positions for which the board held meetings on February 9, 10, 11 and 15.

The official stated that the composition of the selection board was defined in the university statutes.

“In case of selection of officers on the administration position, subject experts and physiologist are not members of the board but unfortunately, they were allowed to sit in the board meeting on February 10 and they awarded marks to candidates being non-members of the board in blatant violation of the university’s statutes and rules,” he added.

The scrutiny and quantification committee, he said, awarded 58.04 marks to one Mohammad Shoaib for the post of assistant director, Planning and Development (BS 17), and another candidate Mohammad Zeeshan was given 45.63 marks by the same committee before the interview.

“Even after the interview, the same candidate was on top of the list and he was required to be recommended for the position.

But, in the accumulative marks sheet, the qualification marks of Shoaib were decreased from 58.06 to 46 and the Zeeshan was allegedly recommended in an illegal manner,” the member of the selection board claimed in his letter.

He opined that the experience of Shoaib was the most relevant - assistant director, PEDO. If his experience was not relevant, how the experience of lecturer, superintendents, administrative officer, resident warden, audit officer, services officer, protection officer, resource persons and researcher commonwealth, account officer, deputy registrar is relevant to the position of deputy director, he argued.

Similarly, for the post of the assistant provost, experience marks as assistant registrar (meetings), were not awarded to a candidate namely Fazal Manan, considering his experience as irrelevant.

This was done to ensure smooth sailing to one Nouman Khan, who is allegedly the relative of the sitting vice-chancellor, the letter stated.

On the other hand, the job experience of the assistant registrar and assistant administrative officer was awarded to another candidate for the position of deputy director, Planning and Development, Abdullah Khan.

Moreover, for the post of deputy director, Planning and Development, the board members, after a consensus, considered Ansa Javed Khan, Mian Ail Zahoor and Mohammad Dawood Jan as the best among the eligible candidates.

The first among them - Ansa Javed - had problems with eligibility. The members of the selection board awarded marks to the candidates and after totalling the marks one Mian Adil secured a place on the top of the list and he was required to be recommended for the post.

But the registrar allegedly handed over another marks sheet to the “illegal” member of the selection board who decreased the marks of Mian Adil from 15 5o 10 so that Miss Ansa could be recommended, the official claimed.

Furthermore, another candidate for the deputy director, Works (BS 18), Sher Ali Khan, is also not relevant and even not eligible for the post.

The experiences of other candidates were not considered. He was also awarded additional marks, the official stated in the letter.

Similarly, experience marks of lecturer were awarded to Ihtishamul Haq and Shams Tabraiz for the post of a network administrator in violation of the statutes and rules. Teaching experience cannot be counted for administrative positions.

The HED nominee also raised serious questions over the appointment of one Dr Mohammad Naeem as a member of the selection board.

He said that the tenure of Dr Azra Khanum was yet to expire as a member of the board and he was appointed against her seat.

Vice-Chancellor Prof Dr Bashir Ahmad, when contacted, brushed aside the allegations as baseless.

He said that the selection board had been constituted in accordance with the prescribed rules and chief justice of Peshawar High Court, chairman, Public Service Commission, nominees of the governors, and representatives of the Higher Education Department were members of the board. How he could do any irregularity in the presence of such people, he argued.

The vice-chancellor said the process was going on fully on merit and no irregularity was committed whatsoever.

“All the members of the board are given a proforma, which they sign and submit on the basis of which merit is decided and recommendations are made,” he went on to add.

He accused two employees of the university, Hussain Gulab, an associate professor, and Imran, a lecturer, for unleashing propaganda against the process.

Prof Dr Bashir Ahmad said that the two were not eligible and had been appointed to the university on the basis of political pressure. He rejected the allegation of recommendation of his relative for one of the administrative positions as baseless.

The vice-chancellor said that he would abide by merit and would continue to resist political pressure. “Let me tell it categorically that I would not bow before the blackmailers and continue my duty honestly in accordance with the university’s rules, regulations and statutes,” he remarked.

He invited this reporter to visit the university and even sit in the selection board meeting to judge the process himself.

Prof Dr Bashir Ahmad said the selection board meetings still continued and the syndicate would be held possible in the next fortnight.