Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Sept 11: Division Bench of High Court comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice AM Magrey has upheld the selection of 33 Dental Surgeons in Health and Family Welfare Department.
According to the case of the petitioners, “in terms of Notification dated 23rd June, 2003, Respondent No. 2 (Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission) invited applications from the candidates fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed under the Recruitment Rules and reflected in the notification for 33 posts of Dental Surgeon in Health and Family Welfare Department”.
The petitioners, private respondents and other eligible candidates responded to the advertisement notice. The selection process was completed and list of selected candidates was published on August 23, 2005. The selected candidates were appointed as Dental Surgeons vide Government order No. 459-HME of 2005 dated August 29, 2005. Aggrieved over their non selection the petitioners challenged the selection of private respondents 3 to 58 and prayed for quashment of Rule 51 of J&K PSC Rules (Business and Procedure Rules, 1980) issued vide Notification No.64-PSC of 2004 dated October 25, 2004.
Senior Advocate DC Raina appearing for the Public Service Commission submitted that the validity of these Rules has already been examined in various petitions, holding the same to be valid. “Rule-51 though held good by the Division Bench vis-à-vis the selection of Engineers, there is stark difference in the Rules of both the services viz., J&K Engineering (Gazetted) Service and Medical Education (Gazetted) service. In Engineering Service there is no such rule providing statutory method of selection as is found in Rule 8 of Rules 1979”, he added.
After hearing Advocate Sudesh Sharma appearing for the petitioners whereas Senior Advocate DC Raina with Advocate Ananta Raina for the PSC, Division Bench observed, “there was no substance in the argument that Rule- 51 earmarks more than 50 marks for interview/viva-voce and therefore, is arbitrary in character and violative of Article 14 and 16 Constitution of India”.
With these observations, the DB dismissed the appeal being without any merit. The judgment for the DB was written by Justice AM Magrey.
Follow our WhatsApp channel