GOVIND RAM Vs. STATE OF J&K & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks the following reliefs:

(2.) The facts, as these emerge from the study of the file under consideration are that an advertisement No.6 of 2004 dated 29.09.2004 was issued by respondents inviting applications from the permanent residents of the State for appointment against different posts. In response to the said advertisement, the petitioner has also applied for the post of Pharmacist. Thereafter respondent Nos.3&4 shortlisted the candidates for the posts of Pharmacist and in Open Category shortlisted 62 candidates and the name of the petitioner figures at serial no.11. The petitioner was called to participate in the selection process and viva voce test. The petitioner faired well in the viva voce and was expecting on his selection on the basis of his merit and performance in the viva voce test. The petitioner was shocked and astonished to see the list issued on 19.12.2006 in which the name of the petitioner did not figure and the candidates having the lower merit than the petitioner have been selected. One such candidate (respondent No.36) whose merit was such lower than that of the petitioner has been selected. It is further contended that the petitioner is highly meritorious and the merit of the petitioner has been ignored and as already mentioned the candidates having less merit/qualification has been selected. The criteria adopted by the respondents in making the selection, was totally unjustified. The criterion was never published; however, the petitioner has come to know that the selection has been made on the basis of following criteria:

(3.) It is further stated that the criteria adopted for making selection by the official respondents is totally illegal and unjustified while formulating the criteria no universal method has been adopted in allocating the marks of qualification and basic training as well as the academic qualification and the higher qualification has been made in such a manner that it has made the academic qualification totally irrelevant for the purpose of selection the criteria as such is totally arbitrary illegal and the selection made on the basis of this criteria is therefore liable to be set aside. It is also contended that the academic merit of the petitioner shows that the petitioner has outstanding merit in academic qualification but proper and the weight age has not been given to the academic qualification which has debarred the petitioner from getting an appointment under the State Government. One weight age to the matriculation and higher qualification along with technical qualification both being essential and eligibility criteria has not been given and the arbitrary criteria adopted by the official respondents has the effect of converting the merit of petitioner into demerit.