Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 684 2026 SLD 684 = 2026 SHC 245
Sindh High Court
C.P. No. D – 2505 of 2025
Presented By: Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi.
Date of hearing and order:-11-02-2026 Mr. Muhammad Rizwan, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Abdul Jalil Zubedi, AAG Sindh alongwith Mr. Akhlaq Ahmed Kalwar, Deputy Director (Recruitment), SPSP, Hyderabad, is present in Court.

[Muhammad Shafqat

VS

. Province of Sindh & others]

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

✅ Summary The petitioner challenged the rejection of his candidature for the post of Lecturer Islamiat (BPS-17) under the disabled quota. Despite securing high marks in the written test, he failed in the interview by scoring only 15/100 marks. His appeals before the relevant authority under recruitment regulations were dismissed. The Commission held that: Interview evaluation is the exclusive domain of the selection committee. Courts can only interfere in case of mala fide or serious irregularity, which was not proven. The petitioner argued that the decision was not a proper speaking order. The Court did not decide the merits and instead: Allowed the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. Disposed of the petition. ⚖️ Sections / Laws Used Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan Sindh Public Service Commission (Recruitment Management) Regulations, 2023 Regulation 161 (appeal provision) 🧾 Two 2-Word Case Descriptions Interview Failure Recruitment Dispute O R D E R Petitioner, Muhammad Shafqat, has filed this Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeking the following relief(s): “I. Set aside the impugned Order dated 20.2.2025, being unlawful, illegal, and passed without any justification.   Restrained the Respondents or their agent from appointing or awarding the position of Lecturer Islamiat (BPS-17) under disable quota to any third person. Declare that the conduct of the Respondents and the press release dated 24.12.2024, against the Petitioner, is discriminatory in nature and is liable to be overturned.   Declare that the impugned order passed by the Respondent is without any reasonable justification and as such liable to be decided afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and shall be passed with the detailed reasons whatsoever:   Call upon…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register