Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Nov 24: In a significant judgment, the High Court today directed police to absorb hundreds of candidates whose services were terminated by the writ court.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Puneet Gupta decided a batch of writ petition and appeals in a common judgment. The bench said that as on date there are 170 vacant posts of Constables (Operator) after appointments made in terms of the impugned judgment passed in 2014 by the writ court and the number of appellants who were earlier appointed as Constables (Operator) on the basis of District wise merit list, whose services were terminated and subsequently engaged as Wireless Assistants on consolidated pay.
The court directed these can be easily adjusted against the said 170 vacant posts of Constables (Operator), thus leaving 19 posts vacant. Consequently, upon adjustment of 151 Wireless Assistants against the aforesaid 170 posts of Constables (Operator), 151 posts of Wireless Assistants will become available.
The Court was informed that the number of private respondents/original applicants in the batch of applications challenging the appointment of the appellants as Wireless Assistants, which were decided by the Central Administrative Tribunal, who are pursuing their cause is 63.
“There were also candidates who had taken part in the recruitment process conducted in terms of the advertisement issued on 09.03.2007 but could not make it either in the merit list prepared at the district level or state level. Though, under normal circumstances, they cannot be considered for appointment in terms of merit and they had not served in any capacity earlier, as the appellants, since, there are sufficient vacancies in the post of Wireless Assistants, these 63 candidates can be considered for appointment as they had successfully pursued their claim before the CAT”, the DB said.
The appellants as stated to be numbering 151 and who are presently serving as Wireless Assistants. Court on that count directed that they shall forthwith be appointed as Constables (Operator) on regular basis by adjusting against the 170 vacant posts of Constables (Operator) and their appointments shall be given effect notionally from the date they were initially appointed as Constables (Operator), without any back wages.
For those persons who are already appointed as Constables (Operator) after the services of the appellants were terminated vide order dated 19.01.2017 court said their status will remain undisturbed and will be en-bloc senior to the appellants as the seniority of the Constables (Operator) should be based on the state level merit list which was prepared in terms of the direction issued by the Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order dated 09.05.2014.
Court in order to avoid any such similar future litigation, directed the official respondents should clarify the status/position of the “Constable (Operator)” qua the “Constable” as provided in the J & K Police Rules, 1960.
The candidates who have continued to pursue their claim till now, stated to be numbering 63. Court directed they shall be appointed as Wireless Assistants against the resultant 151 vacant posts of Wireless Assistants, subject to their suitability and on attaining the benchmark in terms of the performance in the recruitment process pursuant to the advertisement dated 09.03.2007, as may Page be decided by the appointing authority, as observed above, within a period of one month from today.
Court has observed that while the view taken by the Single Judge does appear to be based on the practice and official documents, it does not appear to be consistent with the J&K Police Rules, 1960. It is also true that the post of Constable (Operator) is not specifically mentioned in the aforesaid rules. “Yet, if we accept the view of the Single Judge, it would have the effect of carving out a distinct category of Constables who are working as wireless operators, known as “Constables (Operator)” who would be treated as State Cadre in contradistinction to the “Constables” who are borne on district roll and the Superintendent of Police of the District is the appointing authority”, read the judgment.
The DB clarified that classification of cadre, based on the nature of service rendered, is within the domain of the executive, and in view of lack of clarity in the relevant rules, and in order to avoid any such controversies in future it is desirable that the concerned authority in the Government clarifies this issue, as to whether the Constables (Operator) is a State cadre to be recruited only at the State level and as to who is the appropriate appointing authority in contradistinction to the position that the appointing authority of the constables in general is the Superintendent of Police of the District.
“The problem with the recruitment process in the instant case is that there was no indication in the advertisement of the number of posts/vacancies available in each of the districts. It is not also clarified by the official respondents as to whether the appointments made district wise was based on the actual vacancies occurring in the districts or as per requirements in the districts though the official respondents tried to justify the contentions that the candidates could have ascertained the vacancies in the district from the concerned district police”, Court recorded.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
