news details |
|
|
| CAT quashes selection of Mohammad Hussain Mir as lecturer in super specialty medical oncology | | |
Early Times Report
JAMMU, Feb 3: A bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Jammu comprising Dr. Bhagwan Sahai (A) and Rakesh Sagar Jain (J), while allowing the petition filed by one Dr. Rajeev Gupta, ordered that the impugned selection list issued vide Notification No. 01-PSC (DR-S) of 2018 dated 9-2-2018 whereby respondent no. 6 was selected lecturer Super Specialty (medical oncology) GMC, Jammu is set aside and respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the applicant for the post of Lecturer Super Specialty (Medical Oncology) (GMC, Jammu). The exercise shall be completed within a period of one month.
The case of the applicant is that he having qualification of MBBS, MD (Medicine) and DNB (Medical Oncology) and participated in various national and international seminars had applied for the post of lecturer in medical oncology in Super Specialty Hospital, Government Medical College, Jammu in pursuance to notification No.:03-PSC (DR-P) of 2016 dated 19-02-2016 issued by respondent no.3 (Public Service Commission).
The scheme of selection had been notified vide notification No. 06-PSC (DR) of 2017 dated 7-6-2017. Interview for the post was conducted on 23-1-2018 and thereafter respondent no. 3 issued the impugned final select list thereby selecting respondent No. 6 (Mohammad Hussain Mir) instead of the applicant despite the fact that the applicant is more meritorious. Besides this, the certificate presented by the applicant regarding his participation as a speaker in the national and international seminars was not considered by the experts, and no marks were given for it despite the fact that the applicant is entitled to marks for the certificate in terms of sub-clause III of clause 4 of Notification No. 06-PSC (DR) of 2017 dated 7-6¬2017.
The CAT observed that one can conceive a situation where the candidate happens to be the student of expert at one point of time and in that situation, we may agree with the argument of the counsel for the respondent. In the present case, as per the assertion of the counsel for the applicant respondent no. 6 was the student of respondent no. 4 even on the date of the interview and this assertion has not been denied by the respondents. The bias is a state of mind and it is always difficult to prove the state of mind of a person. That is why while alleging bias it is not necessary to prove whether a person was, in fact, biased for or against someone.
Since respondent 6 was the student of respondent 4 even on the date of the interview, there was close relation between respondent no 4 and 6 and a reasonable likelihood of bias cannot be ruled out and the applicant would have a reasonable apprehension that the selection was be biased. The judgment relied upon by the counsel for respondents no. 2 & 3 is distinguishable for the reason that in those cases the allegations were that the expert had guide of the selectees at some point of time in past.
The CAT allowed the petition and ordered that impugned select list issued vide notification number 01-PSC (DR-S) of 2018 dated 9-2-2018 whereby respondent 6 was selected Lecturer Super Specialty (Medical Oncology) GMC, Jammu is set aside and respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the applicant for the post of Lecturer Super Specialty (medical oncology) GMC, Jammu.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
