Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Oct 17: High Court today upheld the selection for the posts of Junior Legal Assistant for State Legal Services Authority(SLSA) made by the Services Selection Board and directed the SLSA not to re-advertise these posts.
The court of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey allowed the petition of selectees and quashed the impugned communication of SLSA and directed it not to re-advertise the posts.
“Communication No. SLSA/ Estt / R.B / 08 / 2015 / 1476-79 dated 21.04.2016, addressed by SLSA to SSB is quashed. Consequently, SLSA is directed to issue orders of appointment in favour of the petitioner-selectees in terms of the select list formulated by the SSB”, court directed.
Court, however, declined the prayer of the petitioners for directing the authorities that their appointments be made from a retrospective date and said the same is not justified on any count.
The five petitioners approached the court through a writ petition for quashing the letter, bearing No. SLSA / Estt / RB / 08 / 2015 / 1476-79 dated 21.4.2016, whereby SLSA informed the SSB that the select list of candidates for the post of Junior Legal Assistant, State Legal Services Authority, formulated and issued by the Secretary SSB and transmitted to the State Legal Services Authority for issuance of orders in favour of the selectees, stood cancelled on the ground that the SLSA has its own selection board for making selection on post in question.
Court while setting aside the cancellation of selection made by SSB for Junior Legal Assistant in SLSA observed the selections made by the SSB deserve to be saved on the principles of justice, equity and good conscience. Since there is no infraction of any law, rule or regulation made out or established, there being a gulf in the relevant Rule, and this court, apart from a court of law, being a court of equity.
“I feel it would be just, equitable and in fairness of things to hold that the Legal Services Authority was legally not justified in cancelling the select list drawn by the SSB at the close of the selection process on the presumed ground that the quorum of the Selection Committee constituted by the SSB did not conform to Rule 6(5) of the Decentralization Rules, 2010”, elaborated judgment of Justice Magrey reads.
Court also held that it is not a case where an allegation of ‘mala fides’ on the part of the SSB or any of the members of the Selection Committee is attributed. “The candidates, who had responded to the advertisement notice, have undergone the process of selection and have been duly selected. A right has accrued to them for being accorded due consideration to be appointed against the posts”, reads the judgment.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel