news details |
|
|
| HC decides writs challenging selection criteria of Foresters | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Apr 28
First Puisne Judge of J&K High Court Justice Nisar Ahmed Kakru at Jammu in a bunch of writ petitions challenging criteria for the selection of foresters on different points, has decided various points raised in the petitions and observed that evaluation emanates from expert's opinion, therefore, the reasons recorded in the proceeding squarely attracted, obviously interference is uncalled for and weightage of 5 points was awarded to the candidates of post-graduation, no cause for indulgence.
Court after hearing battery of lawyers appearing for the petitioners and respondents including Service Selection Board in which the petitioners having availed of an opportunity of participation in the process of selection for the posts of foresters, unsuccessfully, filed the petitions challenging the selection and also power of Service Selection Board to formulate the criteria fro such selection, not withstanding the fact that the criteria was admittedly well within their knowledge prior to the interview on the basis of the advertising notice issued on September 14, 2004 which came to be clinched by select list published on November 30, 2007 followed by recommendation made to the appointing authority on December 12, 2007.
Grievances against perception of 10 points for DDR and 20 points for BSc Forestry as per the petitioners is on much higher side compare to DDR because the later is a superior technical qualification compared to BSC forestry. The respondents' selectees placed reliance on the communication of India council of agricultural research. The two year DDR course and BSC forestry degree to canvass inequality but the contest out of which the emerges being irrelevant to the controversy in the light of the stand of the board suggested that a well meaning exercise was made to arrive at correct evaluation of DDR course and BSC forestry Degree and there being no material to debase the reasonableness of the evaluation. The interference with the weightage allocated by the board is denied and dismissed the petitions and also vacated the interim directions. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
