news details |
|
|
| Local candidate has edge over outsider: High Court | | SELECTION CRITERIA FOR PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRES | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 14: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri has held that a candidate from the block where the Primary Health Centre (PHC) is located has an edge over the candidate belonging to a different block in the district. This significant judgment has been passed in a bunch of LPAs, challenging the judgement passed by the Single Judge of this Court [“Writ Court”] in four writ petitions led by SWP No.691/2012 titled Nazir Ahmed Dar and others v. State of J&K and others, whereby the Writ Court has accepted the plea of the private respondents herein [“writ petitioners’] that a candidate from the block where the primary health centre is located has an edge over the candidate belonging to a different block in the District and has held the appointment of the candidates belonging to other blocks i.e. non-locals contrary to the NRHM Scheme and para 4 of the Advertisement Notification. The DB observed that the argument of Senior Advocate Z A Shah that preference could be worked out only amongst the suitable candidates and a candidate to be suitable is only who figures in the District level select list is an argument apparently attractive but holds no merit. Suitable candidate would mean a candidate, who is fit to be appointed. There is clear distinction between a ‘suitable candidate’ and ‘meritorious candidate.’
A candidate who is eligible and belongs to the block would be a candidate more suitable to be appointed in the said block as compared to a more meritorious candidate belonging to another block. “Local criteria” is prescribed only to ensure that the doctors and paramedics remain available in the rural areas 24 hrs x 7 days. The Scheme/Mission clearly recognizes failure of the State to ensure the regularly appointed doctors in the far-flung/ rural areas putting the people of such areas to a lot of inconvenience.
The DB further observed that having regard to the nature of local criteria as understood in the scheme, there is no place for candidates, who do not belong to the district concerned to apply and seek consideration for the positions available in the District Health Society of a particular district. The local criteria has been later explained by the official respondents to mean “Local criteria is prescribed only to ensure that the doctors and paramedics remain available in the rural areas 24 hrs x 7 days. The Scheme/Mission clearly recognizes failure of the State to ensure the regularly appointed doctors in the far-flung/ rural areas putting the people of such areas to a lot of inconvenience.”
In a nutshell Division Bench is in agreement with the Writ court that in the matter of selections, which were questioned before the Writ court, the official respondents had acted contrary to and in violation of NRHM Scheme and paragraph No.4 of the advertisement notification.
With these observations, DB found no merit in these appeals, which do deserve dismissal. “However, since these selections and appointments were made in the year 2007 i.e. more than seventeen years back, it would not be appropriate for us to disturb these selections. We are aware that these engagements are contractual, initially for a period of one year and extendable from time to time subject to the satisfactory work and conduct of the candidates. It would, therefore, be in the fitness of the things as also to better serve the ends of justice that the engagements already made are not disturbed and the writ petitioners, who are not in permanent employment of the Government and still interested, are considered for such engagements in the next year,” the DB observed.
“In case there are no vacancies available to adjust the writ petitioners (the private respondents herein), as directed above, the term of engagement of equal number of candidates, who are outsider/non-locals and last in the merit/select list be not extended. The respondents shall adhere to the ‘local criteria’, as envisaged in the scheme in letter and spirit so that in future no unnecessary litigation is generated,” the High Court observed. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
