KANCHAN RANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS in these petitions are working as Anganwari Workers in different Centres. Respondents issued advertisement Notice No. 1 of 1999 dated 9 -3 -1999 inviting applications for the post of Supervisor (Female) in the Social Welfare Department for Divisional Cadre and District Cadre posts from in -service Anganwari Workers. The qualification as prescribed in the advertisement notice is 'Graduate with five years experience' as Anganwari Worker and Matriculate with 10 years experience as such. Petitioners in some of the writ petitions applied for their consideration under both these categories of the Divisional and District Cadre posts respectively. They claim to be eligible as per the qualification and criterion prescribed in the advertisement notice. The grievance of the petitioners is in respect to Notification No. SSB/Div/J/2002/7787 -98 dated 16 -7 -2002 issued by respondents No. 1 and 2 whereby short listing criterion has been published for summoning the candidates for interview. According to the short -listing criterion so adopted the graduates with five years experience with 47.72% and above marks in the qualifying examination and Matriculates with 10 years experience with 51% and above marks for District Kathua, have been summoned for interview. It is this short -listing criterion which has been challenged. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that short -listing criterion cannot be invoked in case of in -service candidates as it applies only for direct recruitment. It is further stated that the length of service and experience itself should be a determining factor and by adopting the short -listing criterion experience has been ignored.

(2.) IT is argued on behalf of some of the petitioners that the post in question is a promotional post and the selection process should be resorted only if sufficient suitable persons are not available for promotion. The challenge is also on the ground that short -listing on the basis of percentage is not permissible and criterion is irrational. In respect to District Kathua, it is stated that the short -listing criterion has been adopted in District Kathua and not in other Districts which itself is discriminatory in nature.

(3.) THIS rule permits short -listing of the candidates and summoning upto five times the number of vacancies. It is stated that the method adopted for selection has the statutory backing and there has been no violation of any rule, law or any other right warranting interference in the writ jurisdiction.