Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Mar 17: High Court today dismissed bunch of petitions challenging Jammu and Kashmir Combined Competitive Examination 2008.
While dismissing petitions Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “there are very irresponsible and unfounded allegations regarding regional bias made by the petitioners, which, on scrutiny, have been found far from truth. The allegation levelled is not substantiated by placing on record any evidence that regional consideration had weighed in the selection”.
“I deem it appropriate to deal with the argument of Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, petitioner appearing in person, that whole selection process is vitiated as the respondents have short listed the candidates for viva voce contrary to Rule 8(4) of the Examination Rules of 2008”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said, adding “it is the contention of the petitioner that despite the fact that some of the candidates did not obtain the minimum qualifying marks in the written part of the Main Examination in all the papers, they were short listed and permitted to sit in the viva voce”.
“The Commission in its reply affidavit has squarely met the argument and submitted that reading Sub-Rule (4) and (5) of Rule 8 of the Examination Rules of 2008 together, it is abundantly clear that a candidate is required to obtain minimum qualifying marks in the written part of the main examination in all the papers and all the papers would mean the papers in the subjects set out in Appendix-I of the Rules”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said, adding “I am not inclined to entertain this plea of the petitioners for yet another reason”.
The petitioners were amongst the candidates short listed for viva voce and they too were short listed in terms of Sub-Rule (4) and (5) of Rule 8 of the Examination Rules of 2008. They did not question the manner in which Sub-Rule (4) and (5) of Examination Rules, 2008 was understood and applied by the Commission. They took calculated chance in the interview and, therefore, they cannot be permitted to turn around and cry foul of the selection process on the ground that there was irregularity committed by the Commission even in the matter of short listing the candidates for viva voce, High Court said.
“The allegation of the petitioners that the cut off in the Scheduled Tribe category for the purposes of short listing was lowered down illegally to favour respondent is without basis and substance. As is apparent from the proviso to Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 9 of the Examination Rules of 2008, if the number of candidates belonging to any category, for the purposes of short listing criteria, falls short of three times the number of vacancies reserved for such category, the Commission shall call the candidates belonging to such category over and above the number short listed for interview”, the High Court said.
Finding that candidates three times the number of vacancies reserved for the category of Scheduled Tribe had not qualified for the interview on the basis of short listing criteria, respondent- Commission lowered the cut off so as to enable the candidates thrice the number of vacancies reserved for category of Scheduled Tribe to participate in the viva voce. The same process was also followed in the case of SC category, the High Court further observed, adding “the Commission has thus, only carried the mandate of proviso to Rule 9(2) of the Examination Rules of 2008 and has committed no illegality”.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel