news details |
|
|
| Appoint petitioners against available vacancies, HC directs State | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu |May 2
Justice Nirmal Singh of J&K High Court Jammu Wing today, in a petition seeking appointment, has directed the state to appoint the petitioners within one month against the vacancies which were available under ST category after treating the private respondents in the earlier writ petition (1993) as the candidates belonging to General Category.
The petitioners in pursuance to advertisement notice for the post of library assistants/ laboratory assistants and other posts in different state departments and belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category had applied for the posts. Of 156 posts 16 posts were reserved for selection amongst the ST category. Remaining unsuccessful to get selected, the petitioners challenged the selection process through a writ petition alleging therein that respondents have selected 16 candidates in the ST category of which three did not belong to the ST category and as such have been wrongly selected. Court disposed off this petition with a direction to respondents on November 19, 1998 to consider the claim of the petitioners. In pursuance of the direction of the Court, the respondents considered the claim of the petitioners and passed order on August 25, 1999, which was challenged in the present petition.
Justice Nirmal Singh, after hearing Adv OP Thakur appearing for the petitioners and Additional Advocate General BS Salathia appearing for the State respondents, observed that in the present case, this Court vide order November 19, 1998 had disposed off the petition which was earlier filed by the petitioners with the directions to consider the claims of the petitioners, taking note of the assertions of the petitioners that the persons selected in ST category does not belong to the said category. A perusal of the order impugned in the instant case shows that the same has been passed in a casual manner. The consideration accorded to the case of the petitioners is no consideration in the eyes of law and case of the petitioners has been wrongly rejected by the respondents.
Court further observed that in the select-list, 16 candidates have been shown to have been selected under ST category but taking into consideration the observations made by the respondents in the order impugned that private respondents 3 and 4 in the earlier petition (1993), who belong to General Category have been wrongly shown to be selected against ST category. It can be said that the vacancies remained unfilled in the ST category and the petitioners who were the candidates available in this category, were wrongly denied the benefit of appointment. With these observations, Court allowed the petition and directed respondents to appoint the petitioners against the vacancies which were available under ST category after treating the private respondents in the earlier petition (1993) belonging to General Category, to which effect is the observation made by the respondents in the order impugned. This shall, however, be done after verifying the certificates of the petitioners so far as the ST category is concerned, appropriate orders of appointment be issued after completion the formality within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is made available to the respondents by the petitioners. The petitioners also be entitled to all the consequential benefits minus monetary benefit, Court ordered. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
