DEV LATA Vs. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the combined competitive examination conducted by the Jammu & Kashmir Public Service Commission, the petitioner came to be appointed directly in the gazetted cadre of the State services and joined her services as such in the year 1984. By dint of her merit and seniority the petitioner reached the super time scale of the J & K Administrative Service and was holding the rank of Commissioner/Secretary to Government at the time when this petition came to be filed. The petitioner on the basis of her seniority of the KAS officers working in the State and other eligibility conditions as laid down in the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations"), became entitled to be considered for appointment by promotion to the Indian Administrative Service against the slots allocated to the State of Jammu & Kashmir for the year 2010.

(2.) The Central Government in consultation with the State Government had determined and allocated six vacancies for the year 2010 which is evident from communication of DOPT issued vide No.14015/09/2011 dated 31.05.2011. At the request of State Government, three out of the six vacancies were kept reserved for three officers of Jammu & Kashmir Administrative Service who had filed some writ petitions in this High Court. The officers for whom three vacancies were decided to be kept reserved were a) Abdul Majid Wani, b) Ajay Kumar Khajuria, and c) Farooq Ahmed Renzu. As a consequence of the decision to reserve three vacancies aforesaid, the respondent No.5 vide its letter No.GAD(Ser.)IAS/48/2010 dated 21.06.2012 requested the respondent No.4 to re-determine the vacancies for the year 2010 to six only, setting apart three vacancies to be reserved for aforementioned officers of the J & K Administrative Service.

(3.) Respondent No.4 vide its subsequent communication issued vide No.14015/9/2012-AIS.I dated 05.07.2012, however, determined eight posts for recruitment by promotion to IAS from amongst the members of the State Civil Service for the year 2010. The three out of the aforesaid eight vacancies were kept reserved at the request of the State Government made in view the litigation filed by three persons. The name of the petitioner amongst others was included in the zone of consideration and was placed at serial No.6. The Selection Committee on the basis of overall relative assessment, graded the petitioner as "very good" for her placement in the select list. Accordingly, she could not be included in the select list of 2010 which was restricted to five due to availability of officers senior to her with similar grading. The petitioner was placed at serial No.6 in the eligibility list and therefore, could not be recommended for appointment by promotion to the IAS. She could not be considered for the select list of 2011, for, by that time she had crossed the age of 54 years provided for induction into IAS.