Back
2018 Supreme(J&K) 176
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Dhiraj Singh Thakur, J.
Astha Sharma and others - Appellants
Vs.
State of J&K and others - Respondents
SWP No. 3086 of 2015, MP Nos. 2 of 2016 & 1 of 2015 c/w, SWP No.2904 of 2015, MP No. 1 of 2015, SWP No. 2965 of 2015, MP Nos. 2 of 2015 & 1 of 2015, SWP No. 3446 of 2014, MP No. 4666 of 2014, SWP No. 2898 of 2015, SWP No.331 of 2017, MP No. 1 of 2017, SWP No.2802 of 2015, MP No. 1 of 2015, SWP No. 3097 of 2015, MP No. 1 of 2015, SWP No. 1186 of 2016, MP No.1 of 2016, SWP No. 2905 of 2015, MP No. 1 of 2015, SWP No. 736 of 2018, MP No. 1 of 2018
Decided On : 03-05-2018
For the Appellant :Mrs. Surinder Kour, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Manpreet Kour, Mr. Anchit H. Sharma, Mr. Parimoksh Seth, Mr. F. A. Natnoo, Mr. Gagan Basotra, Mr. Vipin Gandotra, Mr. Abrar Ahmed, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Raman Sharma, Dy. AG., Mr. Sanjeev Padha, GA., Mr. Suneel Malhotra, GA., Mr. S. S. Ahmed, Mr. Irfan Khan, Mr. Sheikh Najeeb, Mr. Mohd. Shaqir Hussain, Mr. Ajay Gandotra, Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocates.
Important Point – Any document required by Board which was not otherwise supposed to be produced in terms of advertisement notice, would not disqualify a candidate from consideration for appointment.
Headnote:Service Law – Selection – Posts of Junior Physiotherapists – Certificates were required to be produced only for making a recommendation to Government for appointment of candidates – Selection of candidates cannot be said to be bad inasmuch as Board also does not consider candidates ineligible for appointment – No marks at all were prescribed either for basic qualification or for technical qualification, much less for additional qualification – Petitioners are estopped from challenging criteria at this belated stage having participated in process of selection – Mere fact that application forms of petitioners were accepted and they were permitted to participate in process of selection would not create any indefeasible right against petitioners to claim a place in select panel – Board directed to re – work select list. (Paras 20, 23, 24 and 25)
Result – Writ Petition disposed of with directions.
1. In these batch of petitions, the challenge is thrown to the select list dated 05.10.2015 issued by the SSRB for the posts of Junior Physiotherapists. The first ground of challenge to the select list is that some of the selected candidates did not fulfill the requisite eligibility conditions on the last date prescribed as per the notification, i.e., 28.02.2013.
2. The other ground of challenge is to the extent that certain certificates like, bonafide certificate, PRC certificate and internship completion certificate, which were otherwise supposed to be produced at the time of submission of the OMR forms were not so produced in any case before the date of the interview.
3. With a view to understand the background, in which the present controversy has arisen, it becomes necessary to briefly reflect a few material facts.
4. Advertisement notice No. 03 of 2012 dated 28.12.2012 was issued by the SSRB. Certain clauses, which have been subject matter of controversy need to be discussed, as it is in the background of those that the present writ petition will be decided.
5. According to the notification dated 28.12.2012 and Annexure-B, therewith, the requisite qualification prescribed was 10+2 with Diploma in Physiotherapy from any recognized institute. The candidates were required to possess the requisite professional/technical qualification and were also required to fulfill all eligibility conditions as per Annexure-A, B & C to the notification as on 09.02.2013. This was according to clause 3 of the advertisement notification.
6. According to clause 6 of the notification, candidates were required to submit photocopy of duly filled in OMR application alongwith a set of the requisite certificates, experience wherever prescribed.
7. Clause 7 envisaged that incomplete forms in any manner were required to be rejected without notice. However, in the present case, this is not the case, where any of the petitioners challenge that the forms were incomplete. The dispute is only with regard to the acquisition of qualification and the submission of documents before the cut-off date.
8. Clause 11 and 15 of the notification are relevant and are reproduced hereunder for facility of reference:-
“11. The last date for the receipt of application forms as prescribed above shall be the cut off date for determining the eligibility to apply for the post. The age limit, however, is determinable with reference to the 1st of January, 2012. Any qualification/experience acquired thereafter shall not be taken into account for any purpose.
15. The candidate must produce the original qualification/category certificate before the Committee constituted for oral test or as and when the Board may call such documents so that their eligibility for participation in the interview is verified. Any candidate who fails to produce the relevant original documents/ testimonials on the scheduled date shall not be allowed to appear in the written/ oral test.”
9. It appears that although the last date prescribed for receipt of application forms was fixed up to 09.02.2013, the same stood extended twice, i.e., by virtue of notice dated 11.02.2013 the time was extended upto 20.02.2013 and finally by virtue of notice dated 16.02.2013 extension of submission of application forms was given up to 28.02.2013. What was stated in the notification dated 16.02.2013, is reproduced hereunder:-
GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
SERVICES SELECTION BOARD,
SEHKARI BHAWAN, RAIL HEAD, JAMMU
****
www.jkssb.nic.in
SUB: Extension of Sale and date for receipt of OMR/ICR Application forms.
It is notified for information of all the candidates that the last date of sale and receipt of OMR/ICR applications forms against Advertisement Notification No. 03 of 2012 dated 28.12.2012, which was fixed upto 20.02.2013, is hereby extended upto 28.02.2013. However, the other terms and conditions will remain the same as
