SANDEEP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State Police Headquarters (PHQ), vide Advertisement Notice dated 1st March 2011, invited applications from candidates, fulfilling eligibility criteria laid down in the notice, for posts of "Constable in Photography Cadre" in Pay Band-1 Rs. 5200-20200+1800 Grade Pay plus allowance. Candidates, belonging to Leh/Kargil Districts and Gurkha community (State Subjects) were to get benefit of relaxation in physical standards. Applications were to be deposited in the office of respective Range Deputy Inspectors of General by 31st March 2011. Office of Range DIG was to check applications and original testimonials of each candidate, in particular date of birth, minimum education qualification, category certificate and make necessary entries in recruitment register, before their onward submission to Recruitment Board where recruitment process was to be initiated. Petitioners and private respondents responded to advertisement notice. They participated in selection process i.e. physical standard test (PST), Physical Endurance Test (PET), Technical Test. On conclusion of selection process, Select List was issued by PHQ, Jammu under signatures of AIG(P) for DGP vide PHQ No. 1344 of 2012 dated April 11, 2012.

(2.) Petitioners in writ petitions on hand did not find place in the Select List. They, aggrieved with their non-selection and private respondents' selection, throw challenge to the select List through medium of writ petitions on hand on the grounds set out in their respective petitions.

(3.) Petitioners' main grievance, running through weft and warp of all petitions, is that official respondents unmindful of contents of Advertisement Notice, eligibility criteria laid down therein and in violation of rules and regulations, made District-wise selection on the basis of merit computed at district level, instead of selection at State level. It is pleaded that respondents deliberately did not mention number of posts advertised or their category-wise breakup, so as to leave scope for favoritism and compromise with merit. Petitioners insist that advertisement notice did not indicate that posts advertised were district cadre posts or that official respondents proposed to make selection at District level and that respondents changed criteria in the middle of selection process to the detriment of meritorious candidates. Change in selection criteria, according to petitioners, has worked harshly against them and converted merit into demerit and unjustifiably deprived meritorious candidates of an opportunity to get selected against advertised posts. Private respondents are said to have found place in Select List notwithstanding their lower merit as against petitioners. Selection process and Select List are also said to offend J&K Reservation Act, 2004, and J&K Reservation Rules, 2005.