The judgment emphasized the importance of fair opportunity and equality of opportunity in matters of public employment, highlighting the requirement for wide publicity and compliance with prescribed advertisement publication norms.

D. S. Thakur, J.

1. The instant Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 16.11.2017, passed in SWP No. 2344/215.

2. Briefly stated, the material facts are as under:-

3. A petition came to be filed, challenging the tentative panel prepared by the official respondents for the selection and engagement of ReT Teacher in Government High School, Bagla, Zone Ghat Bagla, pursuant to advertisement notice dated 19.08.2014.

4. The case set up by the petitioner in the writ petition was that the petitioner could not apply for the post in question, so advertised, inasmuch as, he had no knowledge of the advertisement dated 19.08.2014, because the advertisement notice was not given wide publicity as per the norms and guidelines prescribed. It was stated that the petitioner got the knowledge about the advertisement notice only after the cut-off date.

5. The petitioner’s case was that as per the norms and guidelines for advertising the post, the notice was required to be routed through the Directorate of Information for wide publicity in the newspapers, in order to enable all eligible candidates to apply for the post in question. Government order No. 671/GAD of 2007 dated 08.06.2007 was relied upon in this Regard.

6. A reference to the said Government order would show that the same envisages that all government departments, public sector undertakings and autonomous bodies under the Government would not issue any official advertisements directly to the press/media and that the same should invariably be routed through the Directorate of Information. Failure on the part of such bodies to adhere to the instructions was to be viewed seriously as per the said government order.

7. The case of the petitioner was that the advertisement was published only in one newspaper, i.e., “Daily Udan” and the same was not was published through the Directorate of Information and hence it was urged that since the said newspaper did not have wide circulation in Village Bagla, therefore, the petitioner was prevented from applying for the post in question. It was in those circumstances prayed that the panel prepared by the official respondents be quashed by issuance of a writ of certiorari.

8. The Writ Court by virtue of the judgment and order impugned allowed the writ petition and quashed the process of selection. A direction was issued to re-advertise the aforesaid posts in the manner as prescribed in the case of Akhtar Rashid Mir & anr. V/s State & ors, 2014(4) JKJ 58 (HC). While placing reliance upon the aforementioned judgment, the Writ Court held that notice was published only in one newspaper, whereas as per the Akhtar Rashid Mir’s case, the same had to be published in three leading daily newspapers.

9. It was held that there was no material to demonstrate that the newspaper “Daily Udan” had wide circulation in District Doda and hence the Writ Court proceeded to hold that the advertisement notice was in violation of the guidelines issued by the Government vide order dated 08.06.2007.

10. Learned counsel for the appellant urged before us that the view expressed by the Writ Court was erroneous in law. It was urged that the judgment relied upon by the Writ Court in Akhtar Rashid Mir did not at all lay down the proposition that an advertisement had to be published in three daily newspapers having wide circulation. However, learned counsel admitted that the advertisement was to be routed only through the Directorate of Information, which according to him was done in the present case.

11. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the official respondents however, supported the view of the appellant and stated that the advertisement infact had been routed through the Directorate of Information and it was only pursuant to that that the advertisement notice was published.

12. It was further urged by Mr. Gupta that the conditions prescribed in Government order dated 08.06.2007 were complied with substantially, as the same ha