news details |
|
|
| Selection record allegedly destroyed | | HC asks VC to file report or appear in person | | Jammu, Feb19- Justice Nirmal Singh of J&K High Court Jammu Wing, in a review petition filed by the candidates, who appeared in the selection process of accounts assistant vide advertisement notice November, 1991, today directed the Vigilance Commissioner (VC) to send a copy of report to this Court on or before the next date of hearing. In case, the report is not submitted, then the Commissioner Vigilance shall appear in person on the next date of hearing.
In the review petition it has been submitted that Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Recruitment Board initiated selection process for the posts of Accounts Assistants vide advertisement notice No 10 of 1991 dated November 26, 1991. Petitioners also applied and in the process, they were declared successful in the written test and appeared in the interview also. As the names of the petitioners didn’t figure in the select list, they filed a writ petition in the State High Court which was allowed vide order of April 2, 1998. Respondent state filed LPA against the said judgment, which came to be dismissed by the High Court. The SLP was also dismissed as withdrawn by the Apex Court on November 25, 2000.
Following failure by the respondents to comply with the Court directions, a contempt petition was filed by the petitioners, which were disposed off by the High Court on September 6, 2004 with the observation “in the facts and circumstances of this case, I am unable to hold so and, therefore, the rule issued against the respondents deserves to be discharged. Accordingly it is so ordered. However, the persons responsible in destroying the record of selection can’t be allowed to escape. Therefore, though the rule against the respondent is discharged, but the Chief Secretary is directed to refer the matter to the Vigilance Commissioner to hold an enquiry and to fix the responsibility on the person (s) who may be responsible for destroying the record of selection made pursuant to advertisement of November, 1991.”
Eighteen petitioners filed review petition seeking direction to register the case against the persons responsible for destroying the record and quashment of the selection of 15 candidates and considering the case of petitioners for appointment to the post of accounts assistant.
Justice Nirmal Singh, after hearing Sr. Adv SS Lehar appearing for the petitioner and AAG and also SK Shukla appearing for the Board, observed that while respondent Board has filed objections the remaining respondents have not filed these despite taking number of opportunities. However, in the interest of justice, one last opportunity of four weeks is allowed to remaining respondents to file objections, subject to payment of cost of Rs 1000/- in each petition. Meanwhile, the Court directed Vigilance Commissioner for a copy of the report failing which he shall have to appear in person on the next date of hearing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
