Customs Union seeks disclosure of exam results

By S.S. Selvanayagam

The Court of Appeal on Friday 13 January issued notices on the Respondents including the Director General of Customs and the Commissioner General of Examinations in respect of Writ application filed by the Customs Inspectors Union seeking an order for the release of the results of limited competitive examination held for the internal promotion to the post of Assistant Superintendent of Customs (Grade II).

President of the Court of Appeal S. Sriskandarajah issued the notices returnable on 3 February.

Petitioner Union cited Director General of Customs Sudarma Karunarathne, Additional Director General of Customs (HR) R.Semasinghe, the Finance and Planning Ministry Secretary P.B.Jayasundara, Commissioner General of Examination Anura Edirisinghe, the Public Service Commission and the Attorney General as Respondents.

Viran Corea with G.D. Gunatillake instructed by Moahan Balendra appeared for the Petitioner Union.

The Finance Ministry Secretary, in January 2011, issued a notice inviting all Chief Inspectors of Customs and Grade I Customs Inspectors who have met the application criteria to sit for the said limited competitive examination, the petition states.

It said these promotions were said to fill 15 per cent of the approved vacancies to be filled in respect of the said post and its members sat for the said examination held on 7 May 2011.

Petitioner further states that the Department of Examination issued the said results to the Sri Lanka Customs and the Petitioner requested the Director General of Customs to release the said results but he failed to release the name list of the candidates who passed the said examination.

On 21 September 2011, the Additional Director General of Customs (HR) responded to the Petitioner drawing the attention to the Rule 77 of the Public Service Commission Procedural Rules Volume I on Appointment, Promotion and Transfer of Public Officers.

He stated accordingly the Sri Lanka Customs would not act in any manner contrary to the provisions of the said Clause.

The said Rule reads, “Where an interview has to be held to allocate marks after a written examination and/or a trade test, marks obtained by the applicants at the written examination and/or the trade test shall not be made available to the board of interview. The results of a written examination and/or the trade test shall not be publicised for whatever reason until the Appointing Authority takes a final decision regarding the appointments.”

Petitioner maintains the said Rule 77 do not apply to their limited competitive examination and contends there are neither statutory nor regulatory impediments to the release of the results of the said examination.

It draws the attention of the Court to Clause 2 of the recruitment notice which provides that a written examination would be held in respect of which 200 marks would be allocated i.e. 100 marks for the paper on Customs procedures and 100 marks for the paper on simple mathematics.

It also draws the cognisance of the Court to Clause 2 of the recruitment notice stipulating that the type of interview to be held for candidates would be an ordinary interview in respect of which marks would not be allocated.

Hence the impugned provisions of Rule 77 do not apply to the said limited competitive examination, it emphasises.