Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 19 (JK)

Jasbir Kour v. State Of J. &K.

2004-02-12

S.K.GUPTA, Y.P.NARGOTRA

body2004
Per Gupta, J. We have heard Mr. H.A. Siddiqui, learned counsel appearing for appellants as well as M/S S.Hakim, Dy.AG, appearing for respondent No.1, Vinod Bakshi, Dy.AG, appearing for respondent No.2 and Mr. Sarfaraz Hamid Rather, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 in extenso. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.10.03 propounded by the learned Single Judge in SWP No. 2844 of 2001, filed by the appellants herein (private respondents 3 to 7 before the Writ Court). By the aforementioned judgment and order, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and quashed the selection of private respondents with a direction to the Service Selection Board to make the selection afresh out of candidates who appeared in pursuance of Notification Nos.01 of 2000 dated 21/09/2000 and 01 of 2001 dated 30/01/2001 after giving due weightage to matriculation and higher qualification equally alongwith technical qualification in accord with the eligibility criteria indicated in the advertisement notice and fixed by the Selection Committee. In pursuance of Advertisement Notices dated 21/09/2000 and 31/01/2001, for the post of Laboratory Assistant in Health Department, the petitioner being eligible applied in both the selections. Both the advertisement notices prescribed the qualification as Matriculation with Diploma in Laboratory Assistant from the State Medical faculty or any other Institute recognized by the J&K Government or anybody authorized by it. The respondent No. 3/petitioner was called for test alongwith other candidates by the Selection Committee. The selection list was issued in the local newspaper on 09/11/2001, depicting the names of respondents 3 to 7 selected for the posts of Laboratory Assistants. The respondent No. 3/petitioner, however, did not find his name in the selection list. The respondent No. 3/petitioner challenged the selection of private respondents before the Writ Court on the ground of being higher in merit than the respondents 3 to 7 ( before the Writ Court). The petitioner stated to have secured 57.3% marks as against 54.20% marks by respondent No. 6 and 54.80% marks by respondent No. 7 in the Diploma Course. Further grievance of the respondent No.3/petitioner is that the selection is made in an arbitrary manner as the criteria for selection was not fixed. The petitioner stated to have secured 57.3% marks as against 54.20% marks by respondent No. 6 and 54.80% marks by respondent No. 7 in the Diploma Course. Further grievance of the respondent No.3/petitioner is that the selection is made in an arbitrary manner as the criteria for selection was not fixed. The plea taken by the Jammu & Kashmir Subordinate Service Recruitment Board (hereinafter for short referred to `J&K SSRB) before the Writ Court in their reply was that respondent No. 3/petitioner obtained 55.17 points whereas last candidate selected obtained 57.84 points, respondent No. 3/petitioner could not be selected being lower in merit. It is pertinent to point out that in the advertisement notice, Matric with diploma in Laboratory Assistant or any other equal qualification was disclosed as the criteria for selection. Whereas the criteria laid down by the Selection Committee, reads as under:- "Weight-age to the basic qualification - 80 Points Viva voce - 20 Points Total: - -100 Points" The award sheet of the selection committee, however, transpires that weightage has been given to the technical qualification i.e. Diploma in Laboratory Technology and viva voce. This clearly shows that no weightage to the basic qualification or even the higher academic qualification was given and the entire selection was based on weightage given to the technical qualification. According to the criteria for selection indicated in the advertisement notice, matric with diploma being the basic qualification, weight-age was required to be given to both these qualifications. The criteria indicated in the advertisement notice and fixed at the time of selection could not be deviated by the selection committee. The selection is clearly in contravention to the criteria specified in the advertisement notice as no weight-age was given to the academic qualification, the entire selection is bad in law and thus the selection of the private respondents before the Writ Court could not be said to be in accordance with law. Once the criteria has been laid down by the selection committee, the same has to be adhered to and the selection made in accordance with the said criteria by the selection committee. The criteria cannot be altered by the selection authority thereafter. Once the criteria has been laid down by the selection committee, the same has to be adhered to and the selection made in accordance with the said criteria by the selection committee. The criteria cannot be altered by the selection authority thereafter. The eligibility criteria for selection was the academic qualification and the technical qualification but the J&K SSRB at the time of selection has neither considered nor given weightage to the academic qualification and based the selection upon the weight-age given to the technical qualification and thus the selection is made in an arbitrary manner. From the record, it appears that the entire weight-age of 80% applied to the technical qualification, whereas due weightage was required to be given to matric and higher qualification equally alongwith technical qualification. The advertisement notice clearly indicated the essential eligibility criteria matriculation with diploma in Laboratory Assistant or any other equal qualification and initially fixed by the selection committee. The selection having been made by the J&K SSRB being in contravention of the criteria laid down in the advertisement notice and fixed by the selection committee initially, is arbitrary and without application of mind. Both the academic qualification and the technical qualification as indicated in the advertisement notice were the essential eligibility criteria and weight-age was to be given to both these qualifications but the J&K SSRB has given weightage only to technical qualification and ignored and the academic qualification while making the selection. The learned Single Judge after having considered all these aspects of the matter in detail, in his elucid judgement, quashed the selection of private respondents before the Writ Court and directed the J&K SSRB to make the selection afresh out of the candidates who appeared pursuant to both notifications (supra) and giving proper weightage to the academic and higher qualification alongwith technical qualification equally as per the criteria laid down in the advertisement notice. The view expressed by the learned Single Judge, in our considered opinion, is the view to which no exception can be taken. The very selection process stands vitiated. We do not find any infirmity in the judgement and order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge, necessitating interference in an appeal. In the above view of the matter, we don not find any merit in the Letters patent Appeal and is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim direction dated 07-11-2003 shall stand vacated in resultant thereof.