KULDEEP PANDITA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER challenges the list of candidates selected for appointment to the post of Lecturers .in Chemistry vide its No; PSC/PAS -84/450 -51 dated 13 -6 -1984 by the respondent No 2 in so for as it relates to the selection of respondents 3 to 7 and order of the Govt. dated 20 -7 -1984 appointing these respondents as Lecturers in Chemistry. A writ of mandamus is sought directing the respondent No; 2 to include the name of the petitioner in the list of the selected candidates and appointment is claimed retrospectively with effect from 20 -7 -1984.

(2.) PETITIONER has asserted in this petition that he had passed M SC. (Chemistry) securing 57.9% marks. He was selected by the University Grants Commission for grant of fellowship for Doctorate in Chemistry. Petitioner obtained Ph. D in Chemistry & the subject which the offered for thesis was ËœAnalytical application of some polyphoneâ„¢sâ„¢ After obtaining Ph.D, petitioner is said to have been appointed Lecturer in Chemistry on adhoc basis, details where of are given in para 3 of the petition. In response to the advertisement notice, petitioner as also respondents 3 to 7 submitted applications for the post of Lecturers. It contended that respondents 3, 4 & 6 were over aged on the dale of filing of applications. The maximum age for making a person eligible for consideration on 1.1,1984 was prescribed as 30 years and the minimum 18 years For Schedule Caste and those already wording in the Jammu and Kashmir State the upper age limit was 32 to 35 years respectively. Those who were working as teachers upper age limit was 40 years. Petitioner as also the respondents 3 to 7 were direct recruits. There fore, they were required to be of 30 years of age on 1.1.1984 The age bar could be relaxed only in case of teachers serving in the Education Department and not in case of direct recruits These respondents could not be considered as they were ineligible The inclusion of respondents in the select list is said to be illegal and bad. Challenge is thrown to the conduct of .the members of the Pub -lie Service Commission who are said to have pursued a communal policy by ignoring the claim of genuine candidates with a view to help the candidates belonging to majority community.

(3.) IN qualifying examination the respondents are said to have secured less marks than the petitioner is of superior merit. In para 10 of the petition ha has detailed out as to how he had fared at interview. The marks allotted for viva voce test are said to be unduly high as compared to the percent age of marks i.e. qualifying examination. It has been done to convert merit into demerit. The relaxation of age bar in favour of some respondents is said to be bad. The selection of candidates was contrary to the eligibly criteria set forth in the Notification issued for the purpose of selection The, selection list Is said to be contrary to Rule 6 of the Jammu 8 - Kashmir Education (Gazetted Service Recruitment Rules) 1975 Selection is said to have been made on communal considerations The marks in viva voce are allotted arbitrarily.