Nim Dorji | Trongsa
Bhutan Broadcasting Service Corporation (BBSC) yesterday requested the Trongsa dzongkhag court not to accept the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in the alleged corruption case against BBSC.
An aggrieved job applicant has sued BBSC for alleged favouritism in the recruitment process. The applicant had also presented his evidence on October 15.
The BBS lawyer submitted that the court should not accept the evidences, saying that they were baseless.
The corporation stated that the shortlisted candidates’ list for viva were announced on the website as per the procedure.
The BBSC submitted that plaintiff had deleted an important note from the announcement made to the shortlisted candidates. The corporation argued that the way the plaintiff had submitted his evidence was misleading.
The plaintiff had submitted BBSC’s announcement as evidence.
The BBSC submitted that it did not post the result for written, audition and viva tests on the website. The corporation posted only the list of the shortlisted candidates on the website and that the plaintiff had mistaken as the result.
It was submitted that the plaintiff had requested the BBS chief executive officer to verify the result, but the human resource division had allowed him to see the result. Based on this the submission made by the plaintiff for not getting the opportunity to see the result was not true, it stated.
The BBSC submitted that the plaintiff after knowing that the viva interview did not go well had dropped his name. It added that the next day after realising what he did was wrong the plaintiff had come to the HR office with his friend to apologise.
The statements from the HR personals and his friends were submitted as evidence.
The organisation submitted that it did not record the viva.
It was submitted that the plaintiff assuming himself as a standby by securing the third position was a mistake and that the term standby was not mentioned anywhere.
It was pointed out that the plaintiff prepared survey questioners to collect information from HRO of various agencies and submitted to the court should not be accepted as it was not related, baseless and was done inappropriately.
The exam committee decided to take 30 percent from written test, 40 percent from the audition, 20 percent from viva and 10 percent from academic marks. The plaintiff secured first in writing, fourth in the audition, eight in viva and sixth in academic.
The final result was declared after consolidating all the results.
It was submitted that the evidence submitted by the plaintiff was not able to prove a single issue, so the court should not accept it.
The BBSC submitted that the case was filed only for harassment, interference and defaming BBSC, so she requested the court to issue an order mentioning that the plaintiff should compensate.
The plaintiff will rebut on November 26 and the witness hearing will be conducted.