IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Ali Mohammad Magrey, Mohan Lal, JJ.
Mudasir Yousuf and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of J&K and Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No.2412/2019 c/w WP(C) No.3317/2019 & WP(C) No.2273/2021
Decided On : 18-04-2022
Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967-Section 110-Appointment of Civil Judge-At best, there could be only 3% horizontal reservation prescribed under Equal Opportunities Act, 1998, and Reservation Rules for physically disabled persons-There were only 42 posts notified-3% of 42 comes to 1.26 posts which can by no mathematical standards be rounded to more than one post for PHC candidates-There is no provision contained in Equal Opportunities Act, 1998, providing for method of computation of vacancies-None of rights of petitioner have been violated and petitioner in instant writ petition has no case-Writ Petition (WP(C) No.3317/2019) dismissed-Other two writ petitions, being WP(C) No. 2412/2019 and WP(C) No.2273/2021, will await decision by Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) No.19590 of 2021 filed against DB judgment dated 03.09.2021. (Paras 42, 43, 44 and 47)
Result-Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.
These three clubbed writ petitions pertain to the grievance of the petitioners concerning the process of selection undertaken by the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission for filling 42 vacancies of Civil Judge (Junior Level)/Munsiff, especially the list of candidates declared to have qualified for admission to viva voce vide Notification No.PSC/EXAM/44/2019 dated 20.06.2019 pursuant to the Advertisement Notification No.PSC/EXAM/2018/39 dated 30.05.2018.
2. Shortly put, the petitioner in the first of these three petitions, viz. WP(C) No.2412/2019, is aggrieved of his non-inclusion in the select list as an Open Merit candidate belonging to Physically Handicapped Category (OM/PHC). The petitioner in the second writ petition, WP(C) No.3317/2019, is aggrieved of the action of the Commission in releasing one post under RBA/PHC category and recommending respondent no.3’s name (in that petition) against the said post under RBA category. The petitioner in the third of these three writ petitions, viz. WP(C) No.2273/2021, an OM candidate, seeks a mandamus to select and appoint him against the post in the OM earmarked for OM/ PHC category, claimed by petitioner in the first of these three writ petitions. The general background facts are narrated hereunder:
3. Respondent no.2, the Commission, by Notification No.PSC/EXAM/2018/39 dated 30.05.2018 notified 42 posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Munsiff in the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs (for short, Law Department), giving the category-wise break up of vacancies as OM : 24; RBA : 08; SC : 04; ST : 04; ALC : 01; and OSC : 01. The aforesaid notification, inter alia, prescribed that 3% horizontal reservation for physically challenged candidates shall apply in accordance with relevant rules. In all 2943 candidates were provisionally allowed to appear in the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Judicial) [Preliminary] Examination, 2018 (hereinafter, Preliminary Examination-2018), conducted on 28.10.2018. Record shows that only 2305 candidates appeared in full in the Preliminary Examination-2018. On the basis of the result thereof, Respondent no.2 issued Notification No.PSC/Exam/19/2018 dated 17.11.2018, notifying the Roll Numbers of the candidates declared to have qualified for admission to the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Judicial) [Main] Examination, 2018 (hereinafter, the Main Examination-2018). As per record, 793 candidates, including 03 physically challenged candidates, qualified for the Mains Examination-2018. The Main Examination-2018 was conducted with effect from 23.03.2019 to 04.04.2019.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Munsiff is regulated by the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Recruitment Rules, 1967 (the Recruitment Rules) framed by the Governor of the State in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 110 of the erstwhile Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir State in consultation with the Commission and the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. The Recruitment Rules did not specifically quantify reservation in favour of any of the categories, muchless the persons with disabilities; nonetheless, in terms of proviso to Rule 13(2) thereof, it has been provided that ‘any candidate, belonging to a class regarding which provision for reservation of appointment or posts has been made, who though not qualified by the standard prescribed by the Commission is best in order of merit according to the results of the examination from that class, shall be recommended for appointment to vacancies reserved for members of such class in that service’. So, essentially, reservation in the Service is permitted by the Recruitment Rules and it becomes axiomatic that the power for accord of such reservation by the High Court stands conferred by the Rules framed under Section 110 of the erstwhile Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir.
5. In February, 1982 the High Court in i
The court ruled that the amendment for reservation in judicial appointments is prospective, affirming that prior selections without statutory backing are unconstitutional but saved appointments remai....
Reservation under the Persons with Disabilities Act is constitutionally mandated and cannot be denied due to post identification lapses; violations warrant legal remedy.
Point of Law : Permanent disability - Appointment - It is true that it is not necessary to frame separate set of rules for providing reservation in appointments of persons other than District Judges ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, regarding the reservation of posts for physically c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reservation provisions for physically challenged persons should be interpreted in conjunction with the government orders in force at the t....
A candidate who consciously participates in the selection process and is aware of the reservation for a specific category is estopped from challenging the selection process after its conclusion.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.