KARACHI: The Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) on Friday informed the Sindh High Court that it was impossible at this stage to separately count disabled persons in the ongoing census by adding a column for them.

A division bench was hearing the constitutional petition filed jointly by a civil rights campaigner, Mohammad Imran Shahzad, and a non-governmental organisation, Pal(istan Association of Blind. They impleaded the interior secretary, statistics division secretary, chief census commissioner, chief secretary of Sindh and National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra) as respondents.

In its reply, the PBS informed the court that it would collect and compile data on dis-ability, including questions on nature of disability, after the census.

It added that the data about disability would be collected through Form-2A of the census on a sample basis after the census.

The court was informed that the same procedure was adopted in the census of 1998. `Form 2A was not a part of census exercise in the censuses of l951, 1961 and 1972 and was introduced as an additional exercise in censuses of 1981 and 1998,` the PBS added.

The bureau submitted that the census activities had commenced on March 15 and for this purpose, over 50 million machine readable forms were printed. A total of 118,000 enumerators and supervisors have been trained accordingly; therefore it would not be possible to add a column for the disabled in the census form at this stage, it explained.Earlier, the petitioners had moved the court against the federal and provincial authorities for not incorporating a separate box in the main census form to count disabled persons.

They submitted that the column for special persons was not incorporated in the form of the census which was being conducted after a gap of 19 years. Therefore, the exact number of disabled persons living in the country would remain unknown, they said, adding that it would lead to trampling of their rights.

The petitioners had asked the court to issue directives for the authorities to add a separate column for disabled persons to count them in the census.

AEF appointments case The SHC on Friday directed the chiefsecretary, the provincial police chief and others to file their respective replies on a constitutional petition against the posting and absorption of police personnelin the Anti-Encroachment Force (AEF) created under the laws of the Board of Revenue.

A two-judge bench also issued notice to the respondents and the provincial law officer and put off the hearing to March 27.

The petition was filed by Sub-Inspector Mehrab Khan, posted at the AEF headquarters in Shah Latif Town.

The petitioner, who was appointed in the force in BPS-14 in 2012, stated that the provincial government passed the bill `The Sindh Public Property` (Removal of Encroachment, Bill 2010) whose Section 17 stated that the AEF would comprise senior and junior rank officers of district management group and provincial services secretariat and not by police.

The petitioner said the AEF being a public organisation required postings and transfers on key positions in an open, transparent, fair and objective manner, whereas police officers in the revenue department were posted in a dubious manner as no objective criteria was followed to assess qualification and suitability of the police officers.He argued that according to Section 17, the force would have director general, directors in each district where inspector, subinspectors and constables would be posted as junior-rank officials.

He said the police officials were `illegally` holding administrative posts in the AEF and in antiencroachment police stations created under the relevant Board of Revenue laws.

The petitioner said the Supreme Court had held that no officer should be allowed to hold administrative post unless initial appointment was made through a competent process.He said any officer holding any office in the province without competent process be de-notiñed and repatriated to their respective parent departments according to the apex court`s order.

He submitted that the police department had already asked the AEF to repatriate and relieve the police ofñcials posted in the force, as the police department had been facing shortage of manpower.

The petitioner said some police inspectors were posted against the posts of DSPs (deputy superintendent of police) and there were serious complaints and inquiriesagainst them for their alleged links with land grabbers.

He explained that 11 police inspectors, 12 sub-inspectors, 10 ASIs, eight head constables were among 89 police personnel posted and absorbed in the AEF. The petitioner asked the court to direct the authorities concerned to repatriate thepolice personneltotheirparent department.

He also requested the court to declare that the absorption of police officers was illegal and unlawful, mala fide and without any lawful authority and set them aside.