JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Kumar, J.

1. This petition by one Mr. Johny, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against an order dated 07.11.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu ["the Tribunal”] in TA No.2800/2020 (Jammu) titled Johny v. UT of J&K and another, whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the petition of the petitioner.

2. Before we advert to the grounds of challenge urged by Mr. Pawan Kumar Kundal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it would be appropriate to narrate few facts as are germane to the disposal of the controversy raised in this petition.

3. Vide advertisement notice No.6 of 2015 dated 01.09.2015, respondent No.2 invited applications for making selection to various posts including five posts of Patwari for District Anantnag. Out of the five posts, notified for District Anantnag, one post was reserved for RBA and one for Scheduled Caste category. The essential qualification prescribed for the post, as indicated in the advertisement notification, was “graduation with knowledge of Urdu”.

4. The petitioner being eligible and possessing the requisite qualification, applied for the post of Patwari under scheduled caste category. The petitioner participated in the written test conducted by respondent No.2 under Roll No.30052016659. He was declared successful in the written examination and was shortlisted for participating in the further process of selection. As contended, name of the petitioner figured at serial No.8 of the said shortlist of candidates.

5. It is further case of the petitioner that on 14.06.2018 i.e. after almost two months of the declaration of the written examination, respondent No.2 issued another notification for conducting examination for testing the “working knowledge of Urdu”, which exam was introduced vide notice dated 18.11.2017. Said exam was scheduled to be held on 01.07.2018. The exam was qualifying in nature with the provision of negative marking for each wrong answer. The qualifying percentage was fixed at 40% for open merit candidates and 35% for other category candidates. The petitioner did not question the notification dated 18.11.2017 and the conduct of exam for testing the „working knowledge of Urdu” and instead participated therein. It was only after the final select list was issued on 26.12.2018, the petitioner found that no candidate was selected under the Scheduled „Caste Category‟ and the note appended to the select list stated that “one post under SC category remained unfilled due to non-availability of eligible candidate”.

6. The petitioner having sensed that he could not make it to the selection for not meeting the benchmark provided for scheduled caste category, challenged notification dated 18.11.2017 on various grounds including that the said criteria was not prescribed at the beginning of the selection process. It seems that initially the writ petition was filed before this Court and registered as SWP No.837/2019, which, on transfer to the Tribunal, was registered as T.A. No.2800/2020 (Jammu). It is this petition which has been dismissed by the Tribunal in terms of the order and judgment impugned in this petition.

7. As is apparent from a reading of the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the petition on the ground that the benchmark for SC category in the examination conducted for testing the working knowledge of Urdu was 35%, whereas the petitioner had secured less than the said percentage and, therefore, was rightly held ineligible. It is this order of the Tribunal, which is called in question by the petitioner on the following grounds:

i) The introduction of examination for testing the working knowledge of Urdu by respondent No.2 vide notification dated 18.11.2017 was illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

ii) The examination for testing the working knowledge of Urdu was introduced midway after the selection process had already been set in motion, thereby taking the petitioner by sur