Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, July 26: Division Bench of State High Court comprising Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice B S Walia has set-aside the order of Writ Court whereby selection/appointment of 146 JEs Mechanical was quashed.
While setting-aside the judgment of Writ Court, Division Bench observed, “there cannot be any dispute with the proposition that the appointment to the post in question cannot be made on the basis of the ratio of 1:3 as prescribed in Note-3 appended to Schedule II (a) of SRO-180 dated 26.05.1997 as the same has been declared to be ultra vires by the Supreme Court”.
“Therefore, we are in agreement with the first conclusion recorded by the Single Judge that appointment cannot be made by following the ratio prescribed in Note-3. However, the issue which is required to be examined is whether in the fact situation of the case, the entire select list is required to be quashed”, the DB said.
Division Bench further observed, “admittedly, the Services Selection Board on 03.07.2007 had reframed the merit list in pursuance of the communication dated 29.03.2007 treating the degree and diploma holders at par and by ignoring the ratio fixed by Note-3 of Schedule II (a) of SRO 180 dated 26.05.1997. In the revised list, admittedly the names of respondents 1 to 21 do not appear. Thus, even on the basis of revised norms, the respondents 1 to 21 have failed to make the grade”.
“It is also pertinent to mention that it is not the case of respondents 1 to 21 that they are more meritorious than the candidates, who have been selected. Thus, by preparation of the revised merit list by the Board, the basic infirmity which previous merit list had, disappeared and the merit list was prepared on the basis of merit ignoring the ratio of 1:3 as prescribed in Note-3”, the DB further said, adding “the revised merit list does not contain the names of candidates whose marks have found to be tampered. Therefore, even this irregularity has vanished with the preparation of revised list during the pendency of the writ petition”.
The DB further observed, “the infirmity from which the first merit list suffered, having been removed by preparation of revised merit list, and the persons, who were unlawfully benefited or wrongfully deprived of their selection, are identifiable”, adding “the instant case is not the case of illegal appointment but an appointment which suffers from procedural infirmity which is not fatal to the process of selection”.
“Therefore, the entire select list ought not to have been quashed by the Single Judge and it is also noteworthy that respondents 1 to 21 have not been able to make a grade either in the first merit list or in the revised merit list. Therefore, at the instance of respondents 1 to 21 no interference in the matter is called for especially at this point of time when selected candidates have put in more than 13 years of service and might have been further promoted”, the DB said.
Division Bench directed that Board as well as the State Government shall ensure that the list does not contain the names of the candidates, whose marks have been found to be tampered and Board shall send an intimation to the candidates, who have been found to be eligible as per revised merit list for appearing in the interview and result of such candidates, who appear in interview shall be declared.
“In case of such candidates the State Government shall be free to exercise powers under Rule 22(b) of 1992 Rules”, the DB added.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel