The bench directed the KIU administration that the candidates who as per test conducted by the Bahria University qualified in the respective subjects and also stood qualified in aggregate marks not less that 40 per cent provided they come in order of merit e.g. three persons against one seat, shall be appointed against vacancies existing at the time of advertisement.
Those appointed in spite of being third divisioners in their entire career shall not be included in such criteria, the court said.
The court also directed the KIU administration to consider and appoint those contractual employees who got jobs in different disciplines after going through the process of test/interview.
The court said: “The selection process as envisaged has not gone through the golden scale of transparency and justice which should be the only criteria in a mother institution like KIU”.
The court observed, “during the investigation of the matter threadbare and having heard the respective counsels, it would have declared the entire process of recruitment null and void, but keeping in view the overall minus impact on imparting smooth education in the university and particularly in the interest of the stu dents the court has avoided to pass such an order”.
But at the same time, the court observed that it was expected from the administration of the KIU not to repeat the bitter experience.
The bench said any institution or authority vested with discretionary power may not exercise them arbitrarily subservient to any personal interest but should exercise it justly and under the norms appreciable by a civilised society.
The KIU selection merit list had candidates who had failed in their relevant subjects but were shown successful. The court also examined this matter and directed the authorities of KIU that weightage shall also be given to the relevant subjects in future because the material thing for appointment was the subject against which the candidate has to be considered. Haji Mirza Ali and Mohammad Issa appeared on behalf of the petitioners while Syed Nayyar Hussain Bukhari and Syed Jaffar Hussain represented the respondents.