Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 12: Division Bench of State High Court comprising Chief Justice M M Kumar and Justice J P Singh today allowed the bunch of appeals filed by the State and its officers and set-aside the order of Single Judge in the selection of Sub-Inspectors in State Police.
After hearing both the sides, Division Bench observed, “the selection process was initiated by issuance of advertisement notice on February 25, 1999 and a select list of 252 candidates was issued by the Police Headquarters on April 23, 2000 which was prepared on the basis of two different provinces of the State. However, the list was challenged and the litigation culminated into the judgment of Supreme Court delivered on February 10, 2004”.
“The follow up action was taken and the merit list was prepared by treating the whole State as one unit which resulted in edging out of 47 candidates. However, these candidates along with 22 candidates who were impleaded as party before the Supreme Court became the beneficiary of the statement made by the Advocate General that 47 candidates had served the State for a considerable period of seven years and in order to put an end to the whole controversy concession to 22 candidates was also granted”, the DB said.
Senior Additional Advocate General, Gagan Basotra submitted that there was nothing extra ordinary in the statement made by the Advocate General in respect of 47 candidates. Likewise, the statement made in favour of 22 candidates has also been accepted by the Supreme Court.
Observing that the acceptance of statement would not constitute declaration of law within the meaning of Article 141 of the Constitution, the DB held, “a fence sitter cannot succeed in securing the equitable relief under Article 226 of the Constitution and the Courts come to rescue of those who are vigilant about their rights. For the abundance of legal authority on the proposition that delay plays a significant part in the grant or denial of relief to a writ petitioner, we have no option but to adversely comment upon the conduct of the writ petitioner- respondents particularly when an order passed in 2008 would not constitute the cause of action nor would it confer any right as it has genesis in the order passed by the Supreme Court which was issued in pursuance of exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution”.
With these observations, Division Bench allowed the appeal filed by State and judgments of the Single Judge were set aside.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel