Court directs CS to issue orders for appointment of petitioner as Junior Asstt under ‘OSC category’



JAMMU: A Division Bench of J&K High Court comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajnesh Oswal, while disposing of an appeal, directed the Chief Secretary for issuing appropriate orders for appointment of petitioner as Junior Assistant under ‘OSC category’. The bench directed that whole matter with regard to selection and appointment of writ petitioner as Junior Assistant under ‘OSC category’ shall be placed before the Chief Secretary of Union Territory of J&K, who shall issue appropriate orders for appointment of writ petitioner as Junior Assistant under ‘OSC category available in any of departments of Union Territory viz Tourism, Finance, Health, PWD, Planning and Development, Higher Education, Animal Husbandry and Cooperative.
DB further said that in case no post of Junior Assistant under ‘OSC category is available to accommodate writ petitioner, the Chief Secretary shall utilise any other available post of Junior Assistant in any of aforesaid departments or some other departments so as to meet out justice to writ petitioner. The appointment of the writ petitioner shall date back to the date when the candidates selected pursuant to Advertisement Notice No.02 of 2011 were selected and appointed by the Government/department(s) concerned. The writ petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits, minus monetary benefits.
The appeal filed by State of Jammu and Kashmir (now Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir), in terms of Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, is directed against judgment dated November 23, 2016, passed in SWP No.607/2016 titled ‘Sheikh Mushtaq Ahmad vs. State of J&K & others’ whereby Writ Court has allowed writ petition and quashed the impugned communication bearing No.SSB/Secy/ Sel/2016/4663-64 dated March 10, 2016, with directions to appellants to appoint the respondent No.1 herein (hereinafter the writ petitioner) against a post of Junior Assistant within a period of one month.
Division Bench observed that there is no dispute with regard to proposition that placing of a candidate in the select list does not confer upon him a right to be appointed and the appointment can be denied to such selected candidates for good reasons. Non-availability of vacancy can be a good reason to deny appointment to the writ petitioner in the instant case but the facts of this case are entirely different. The writ petitioner had not applied for selection to the post of Junior Assistant in Department of Finance only. He had applied for all the 93 vacancies which were available in different departments and had been clubbed together by respondent Board for making selection.
The writ petitioner was not even aware about number of vacancies and their break-up contained in the requisitions received by Service Selection Board from different departments. Absent the clarification from the Service Selection Board with regard to the notification of one out of 93 vacancies of Junior Assistant under ‘OSC’ category, this Court has no option but to believe that the selection of writ petitioner has been made against the available vacancy of Junior Assistant under ‘OSC’ category. However, this Court on perusal of the incomplete record made available has not been able to come to any definite conclusion. Making of recommendation of writ petitioner for his appointment against the post of Junior Assistant under ‘OSC category in the Finance Department was the decision of the Service Selection Board not attributable to the writ petitioner. In these circumstances, denying appointment to the writ petitioner would be highly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India. In such situation, this Court is well within its right to step in and undo the injustice.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here