Jammu, Jan 4: A DB comprising of Chief Justice N Kotishwar Singh and Justice Rajesh Sekhri, while hearing a case on question pertains to the posts of Naib Tehsildar has clarified the dynamics of the recruitment process, emphasizing the absence of a vested right for individuals in claiming consideration for specific advertised posts until the entire recruitment process is concluded.
In the case the court found that the seniority list prepared based on advertisement-wise vacancies violated relevant service rules.
It highlighted the absence of a year-wise vacancy concept in direct recruitment, contrasting it with promotions.
It underscored that if the recruitment process for advertised posts is not initiated or completed, and new posts are subsequently advertised, all individuals meeting the eligibility criteria at that time are entitled to apply & established that direct recruitment posts must be open to all eligible candidates when advertised, eliminating the possibility of reservations for specific groups.
DB added that in the present case, there is no mention in the relevant service rules that vacancies occurring in a particular year against direct recruitment quota have to be filled up from amongst the eligible candidates of that period or advertisement.
Further, it was not mentioned in the advertisements that the appointments will be made advertisement wise. It has been also noted that there was only one written test and one interview process.
There were no separate written tests and separate interviews for these different categories of candidates as per advertisements issued in 2002, 2005 and 2008. The interview was conducted as if all the posts were advertised together and as per records, all the posts were clubbed together”, the DB observed.
The DB held that the seniority list prepared on the basis of advertisement wise vacancy in terms of the advertisements issued in 2002, 2005 and 2008 is not only impermissible under law but also violative of the provisions of Rule 24 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 for the purpose of determining seniority and to that extent the impugned seniority list dated 08.10.2013 prepared is not valid and accordingly, the same is quashed and set aside as far as the present appellants and private respondents are concerned, and not for others, as they have not questioned the final seniority list before us and we do not wish to disturb the position at this stage except for the appellants and the private respondents.
Consequently, the court quashed the list and ordered a review for potential promotions to the position of Tehsildars & the order stressed the importance of determining seniority based on the merit position obtained by candidates in a common competitive examination.
It directed a timely review process to avoid complications and orders that individuals previously promoted as Tehsildars maintain their positions, with adjustments in seniority as per the recommendations of the Review Departmental Promotion Committee.
|