Judgment

Sanjeev Kumar, J.-The petitioner is serving in Sher-e-Kashmir, University of Agriculture Science and Technology (SKUAST), Jammu as Assistant-cum-Typist and is holding the selection scale since 27.03.2013. He came to be appointed as Assistant-cum-Typist in the then pay scale of Rs.3050-75-4590 and was posted in the Directorate of Resident Instructions Wing of SKUAST vide University Order No.75(Estt) of 2002 dated 13.08.2002.

2. In the Schedule-I to Chapter III (General Administration Cadre), there is a provision for placement of 30% of sanctioned strength of Assistant-cum-Typist/Dispatch/Receipt/Stationary/Store clerk and equivalent ministerial posts in the selection scale of Rs.4000-6000 subject to such incumbents having at least five years experience and good service record. This placement is provided to be made on the basis of merit and suitability. The petitioner, who was appointed as Assistant-cum-Typist on 13.08.2002 acquired the requisite five years experience on 12.08.2007 and, therefore, became entitled to be placed in the selection grade subject, of course, to the availability of vacancy and her merit and suitability. It is pleaded that in the year 2007, when the petitioner acquired the eligibility for placement in the selection grade, the total sanctioned strength of Assistant-cum-Typist was 47 in the SKUAST and, therefore, 14 posts were the selection grade posts. It is submitted that some of the seniors amongst the Assistant-cum-Typists got promoted as Head Assistants and those falling next in the order of seniority became eligible for their placement in the selection grade under 30% quota earmarked by the Rules for the purpose.

3. The petitioner has given the details of 30% employees, who were placed in the selection grade from time to time and the last one being one Rajni Bharti, appointed along with the petitioner, was placed in the selection scale w.e.f. 21.11.2008 (substantively) and w.e.f 13.08.2007 (notionally). Next in the order of seniority was one Tabrez Ahmed who was followed by the petitioner. Both Tabrez Ahmed and petitioner having completed their five years service on 12.08.2007, were eligible to be placed in the selection scale immediately on the accrual of vacancies.

4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite there being vacancies available, vide order dated 07.03.2013, aforesaid Tabrez Ahmed was given the benefit of selection scale and the petitioner was dropped. It is submitted that the order dated 07.03.2013 whereby the said Tabrez Ahmed was placed in the selection scale indicates that apart from Tabrez Ahmed, some more candidates were cleared for placement in the selection scale. However, the annexure appended with the said order contains only one name i.e. the name of Tabrez Ahmed. This is how, the petitioner claims, she was ignored. The petitioner claims to have made repeated representations to the Authorities, but nothing fruitful was done. It was only on 11.09.2013, the respondents-University vide Order No. 238 (Est) of 2013 placed the petitioner in the selection scale prospectively w.e.f 27.03.2013. The petitioner submits that, though her grievance with regard to her placement in the selection scale was partially redressed, but her appointment was not given effect from the date the vacancy was available and, she was also eligible and the only candidate next in the order of seniority to be placed in the selection scale.

5. The grouse of the petitioner is that the aforesaid Tabrez Ahmed, who had acquired the eligibility along with the petitioner was placed in the selection scale w.e.f 20.06.2008, whereas the petitioner was so placed only on 27.03.2013. It is in this backdrop, the petitioner has assailed the University Order dated 11.09.2013 insofar as it has the effect of denying the placement of the petitioner in the selection scale retrospectively w.e.f the date the vacancy in the quota became available.

6. On being put on notice, the respondents have entered appearance t