Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 177 (JK)

Mohd. Azhar Suharwardi v. State Of J&K

2016-04-06

ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY, N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Magrey, J. Since these two writ petitions raise similar issue for determination, therefore, this judgment and order shall govern both. 2. In the instant petitions, petitioners have questioned the communication Nos. 8749/GS dated 18.12.2012 and 1754/GS dated 14.05.2013, by virtue of which respondent, Registrar General, on the decision of the High Court has returned the selection list of 24 candidates against the post of Court Managers to the Secretary to Government, Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar, for its onward transmission to the J&K Public Service Commission to make selection by following the procedure prescribed for the recruitment of Munsiff, in this regard. BRIEF FACTS 3. In terms of Government Order No. 2485-LD(A) of 2011 dated 24.08.2011 issued by the Secretary to Government, Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, sanction has been accorded to the creation of 24 posts of Court Managers for the Judiciary in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Accordingly, a request was made to the High Court through Registrar General vide communication dated 12.01.2012 for referring the said post to the State Public Service Commission for making selection of the candidates. 4. In response to the aforesaid communication, Registrar General of the High Court, in terms of communication No. 20974/G.S. dated 15.02.2012 informed the Commission about the creation of 24 posts of Court Manager for the Judiciary by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, which was responded to by the Commission vide its letter dated 17.02.2012 seeking clarification on various points regarding the manner and methodology to be adopted for the recruitment of the said post. 5. The said communication was answered by the Government Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs vide letter No. LD(A)208/13th/FC/Part-III dated 23.02.2012 furnishing in detail the break up of the posts, the method and manner to be adopted besides providing the prescribed requisition form. The Commission, thereafter, advertised the 24 posts of Court Manager for Judiciary in the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs vide Notification No. 03-PSC of 2012 dated 24.02.2012. 6. Subsequent thereto, in terms of Notification No. PSC/EXAM/12/85 dated 19.06.2012, the Commission declared the result of the screening test conducted for the purpose by the Commission, short listing 80 candidates out of 1655 candidates who appeared for it. 7. 6. Subsequent thereto, in terms of Notification No. PSC/EXAM/12/85 dated 19.06.2012, the Commission declared the result of the screening test conducted for the purpose by the Commission, short listing 80 candidates out of 1655 candidates who appeared for it. 7. The interview of the short listed candidates, thereafter, was conducted and based on the performance 24 candidates were selected and sent to the Government, which in turn, vide letter No. LD(A)2008/13th FC/Part-IV dated 23.08.2012, sent the final select list to the Jammu and Kashmir High Court for necessary action. 8. Thereafter, it is averred that, in terms of letter No. 8749/GS dated 18.12.2012 issued by the Registrar General of the High Court the select list was returned to the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs on the ground that the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967 were not followed in the recruitment procedure. 9. The Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs thereafter requested to the High Court to issue the appointment orders to the selected candidates in view of the fact that High Court has indicated by conducting medical examination of the selected candidates and initiating verification process of their credentials. 10. Thereafter, it is further averred, Registrar General vide letter No. 1754/GS dated 14.05.2013 intimated the Government Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs that matter, in light of the reply given by the Govt., was placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and his Lordship was pleased to refer the same to the Committee of Hon'ble Judges for consideration and the Hon'ble Committee has rejected the select list being in violation of Rule 10(2) of the J&K Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967 and the Hon'ble Committee has recommended that fresh process be initiated for making selection against the aforesaid posts from the stage of conducting viva-voce examination strictly in accordance with Rule 10(2) of the said Rules. Rule 10 (2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967, is reproduced hereunder:- "For the purpose of conducting viva-voce examination the Commission shall request +he Chief Justice either by himself or through a Judge of the Court nominated by him to act as an expert on the Commission." 11. Rule 10 (2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967, is reproduced hereunder:- "For the purpose of conducting viva-voce examination the Commission shall request +he Chief Justice either by himself or through a Judge of the Court nominated by him to act as an expert on the Commission." 11. Petitioners are aggrieved of the communications calling for fresh process of selection, therefore, have filed the instant petition to seek its quashment and a direction upon respondents to appoint them as Court Managers in terms of the selection made against the said posts. 12. Respondents, on notice, appeared and filed their reply and during the pendency of the writ petition, respondents were asked to ascertain as to whether the Court Managers have been continued beyond the period of 13th Finance Commission in other States. 13. Learned appearing counsel for the respondents submits that the scheme is continuing even in 14th Finance Commission. When the cases were heard the Court pointed out the violation of Rule as well as the settled principle of law that mere placement of the name in the select list will not confer any right to seek appointment. 14. Learned senior counsels for petitioners while registering the observations of the Court had sought time to report instructions. 15. Mr. Z.A. Shah, Learned Senior Counsel, conveyed the instructions of the petitioners having reference to settlement of the writ petitions by asking the Government and Public Service Commission to adhere to the decision of the High Court as communicated in terms of communication No. 1754/GS dated 14.05.2013 with further submission that the Commission may be asked to expedite the viva voce in tune with the decision of the High Court. 16. In the above background the writ petitions are taken on board and disposed of in the following manner:- 3rd Respondent shall act upon the communication No. 1754/GS dated 14.05.2013 of the Registrar General and make selection against the post of Court Managers by associating High Court from the stage of Viva Voce strictly in accordance with Rule 10(2) of the J&K Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules 1967. The process of selection shall be taken to its logical conclusion by all the respondents within a period of one month from the date copy of the order is served upon them. 17. Disposed of along with connected CMPs. No costs.