Ghulam Mohammad Dar vs State and Others

Bashir A. Kirmani, J.—Claiming to have sought candidature for selection as Rehbar-i-Taleem against a vacancy available in Boys Middle

School, Waripora Tehsil Handwara, the petitioner maintains that even though fully eligible he was not considered for the job and instead

respondent No. 5 who was lesser in merit than him was empanelled. Aggrieved thereby he seeks a direction against respondents to accept his

candidature for the aforesaid post, and also to prohibit them from preparing a final panel in the matter.

In their reply the official respondents 1 to 4 have among other things pleaded that two posts of Rehbar-i-Taleem available in aforementioned

school were advertised for inviting applications but in response only four applications were received within the cut off date i.e. 31-08-2004 and the

applicants accordingly empanelled, while petitioner approached the concerned ZEO alongwith his application on 2.9.2004 when his application

could not be entertained and accordingly he could not be considered for empanelment. In his separate memo of objections private respondent No.

5 has pleaded that he, like others empanelled, applied for the post well in time and being at S.No. 3 of the panel had bright prospect of being

appointed because the candidate at S.No. 2 had not furnished requisite documents alongwith his application. During course of submissions learned

Counsel appearing for parties have reiterated the contents of their respective pleadings.

I have heard learned Counsel and considered the matter. Perusal of the official file pertaining to selection as furnished by the respondent's

counsel even though containing the advertisement notice in original does not have anything to suggest that the posts were duly advertised in the

concerned area as they should have been for giving vast publicity to attract all the eligible candidates. There is absolutely nothing on record to show

that any exercise whatsoever for publicizing the availability of posts and inviting applications has been undertaken by the concerned officials even

though as per typed foot note No. 5 to the officially prepared panel wide publicity has been given. The footnote as a matter of fact appears to be a

part of the printed format meant for preparation of panels of selected candidates and appears to be there as a matters of routine, but for want of

any supporting material, devoid of substance. In absence of anything reliable to suggest that the posts available for being filled up were duly

advertised, the selection appears to have been faulty, right at the take off print due to which all the subsequent developments lack in legitimacy.

In addition thereto a perusal of the original panel and carbon copy thereof as on the official file are both shown to bear the signatures of the

members of concerned Village Education Committee but incidentally while signatures of members purporting to have signed at S.No. 1 and 2 do

tally on the two, those at S.No. 3 and 4 appear to be substantially different both in appearance and flow, rendering either of the two doubtful. That

it is so reflects the casual attitude/approach with which the selection process appears to have been conducted. This aspect not only renders the

selection doubtful but also the concerned Headmaster and ZEO accountable for the discrepancy.

For what has been stated above, the posts, as already said, not having been duly advertised and the selection process appearing to suffer from

unexplained discrepancies, the question pertaining to fixation of last date for receipt of application and the factum of petitioner's presentation of

application within or beyond the time, alongwith non-submission of documents in case of the candidate empanelled at S.No. 2, becomes irrelevant,

for the reasons that these aspects could attain some relevance only if the selection process would have been well founded procedurally which it

does not appear to be. This renders consideration of grounds of petition or those pleaded by respondents unnecessary.

Accordingly, for foregoing reasons, the selection process undertaken as aforesaid is quashed, with a direction to respondents to commence the

same afresh within four weeks from now in strict accordance with the relevant Scheme, the government policy and instructions governing the

matter, allowing all eligible candidates alongwith petitioner and others empanelled as above an opportunity to participate on their own merit and

subject to their eligibility. The petition stands accordingly disposed of alongwith connected CMPs. Records produced be returned to the learned

Counsel for the respondents.