ISLAMABAD, 17 JULY (DNA) — The Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that every dispute regarding appointments in public universities could not be treated as a constitutional case. The court emphasized that unsuccessful candidates could not invoke constitutional jurisdiction simply by alleging a lack of transparency or procedural violations.
In its detailed written judgment released on Friday, the court overturned the decision of the Sindh High Court and restored the decisions of the Karachi University’s selection committee and syndicate regarding the appointment of professors. The Federal Constitutional Court stated in its verdict that constitutional jurisdiction could only be exercised when the legality of the recruitment process was fundamentally compromised.
Intervening in every matter to conduct a judicial review would effectively turn courts into appellate forums for appointments, which was contrary to Article 199 of the Constitution. The court further observed that acting as an appellate forum for educational institutions was inconsistent with the autonomy granted to universities. Public universities were expected to complete the recruitment process in a fair and transparent manner, strictly in accordance with their respective statutes and regulations.
The case originated when Dr. Feroz Alam Jafri challenged, in Sindh High Court, the recruitment process for professors at the University of Karachi. The High Court had nullified the appointments, noting that a member of the selection committee was also a candidate for a position. However, the Federal Constitutional Court set aside the High Court’s ruling, upholding the original decisions made by the university’s selection committee and syndicate. — DNA
