SANJEEV KUMAR AND ANR vs STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ORS

The prayer in the writ petition is as follows:-

“i) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding upon Respondent No: 2 to conduct the screening test of the petitioners

for the purpose of short listing to the viva voce for the post of Lecturer 10+2 Biotechnology in the Department of School Education, selection

process for which was initiated vide Notification No:07-PSC of 2009 dated 9th March, 2009 (Annexure-B); ii) Writ, order or direction in the nature

of Writ of Mandamus commanding upon the respondents to allow the petitioners to participate in the viva voce/interview to be held by Respondent No:

2 for the post of Lecturer 10+2 Biotechnology in the Department of School Education, selection process for which was initiated vide Notification No.

07-PSC of 2009 dated 9th March, 2009 (Annexure-B).â€​

Case of the petitioners in the instant writ petition is that in pursuance of Advertisement Notification No: 07-PSC of 2009 dated 9th March, 2009

issued by respondent No. 2, which came to be published in Daily Excelsior Newspaper and was also posted on the official website of respondent

No. 2, petitioners submitted their application forms for the post of Lecturer 10+2 Biotechnology in the School Education Department. As per

Notification and under Rule 40 of J&K Public Service Commission (Business and Procedure)Rules, 1980, the Public Service Commission decided

to hold a screening test for the purpose of short listing the candidates and accordingly dates for holding the screening test were notified.Â

However, the screening test as per the dates notified was not held and the same was postponed time and again. It is contended that the

information with regard to the postponement was given in the Daily Excelsior newspaper and was also posted on the official website of the Public

Service Commission. Since all the notifications right from the date of issuance of advertisement notification and subsequent thereto were published

in Daily Excelsior as also were posted on the official website of the Public Service Commission, as such the petitioners had been diligently and

carefully tracking the aforesaid source of information. It is further contended that respondent No. 2 while fixing the date for holding the

screening test, decided to give information to the candidates by publishing the Notification in this behalf in the State Times and Kashmir Times

newspapers and the said information was not posted on the official website. As a result of which, the petitioners were deprived like many other

candidates. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners have filed the instant writ petition.

Short grievance of the petitioners isthat respondent No. 2, while fixing the date for holding the screening test, had given information to the

candidates by publishing the notification in the aforesaid two newspapers, whereas earlier the advertisement notice was published in the Daily

Excelsior newspaper. In the absence of publication of notification in Daily Excelsior Newspaperfor conducting screening test, the petitioners could

not participate in the same.

Mr. Sunil Malhotra, learned Government Advocate appears for respondent No. 1 and Mr. F.A.Natnoo appears for respondent No. 2.

In the objections filed by respondent No. 2, at Para “A†it is stated that the publication of notification for conducting screening test has

made in the Kashmir Times and State Times newspapers and it is the Director Information, who alone is entitled to make publication and

respondent No. 2 has no role to play in publication of notifications in the newspapers.

Objection of the respondents is sustained because the publication has been done by the Director Information and they choose the paper. It is not the

fault of the official respondents herein. In any event, the publication has been made in approved Newspaper having wide circulation, which is not

denied by the petitioners and, therefore, they cannot have any grievance, as aforesaid.

In light of the above, the relief sought for by the petitioners in the writ petition cannot be granted. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.