Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6940
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, J, Ram Mohan Johri, A
Lekh Raj, Mudaser Ahmed, Javaid Iqbal, Asif Iqbal, Arif Hussain, Rohit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu & Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu – Respondent
Transfer Application No. 8007/2021 | SWP/WP(C) No. 449/2011
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Anil Sethi
For the Respondents: Mr. Hunar Gupta, D.A.G
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot challenge the outcome unless they demonstrate procedural violations that caused demonstrable prejudice.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Writ of mandamus - Petitioners sought disclosure of vacancies and selection records for Constable posts in J&K Executive Police - Allegations of lack of transparency and arbitrariness in the selection process - Petitioners participated in selection but were not selected due to below-cutoff marks - Court found no merit in claims of non-disclosure affecting selection outcome. (Paras 10-19)
(B) Principle of estoppel - Candidates participating in selection cannot challenge process post-results unless procedural violations causing prejudice are established - Petitioners failed to demonstrate how non-disclosure of vacancies adversely affected them. (Paras 12-14)
(C) Sports quota claims - Petitioners did not possess requisite national-level sports certificates as per applicable rules; therefore, claims for additional marks under sports category were untenable. (Paras 15-16)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, residents of District Doda, applied for Constable posts under Advertisement Notice No. DIP/JK-298 dated 08.04.2010, alleging non-disclosure of vacancies and unfair selection despite meeting eligibility criteria. Respondents claimed selection was conducted transparently, and petitioners did not secure requisite marks.
Findings of Court:
The selection process was found to be fair, and the petitioners were estopped from challenging the outcome due to their voluntary participation without protest.
Issues: Whether the selection process was vitiated by arbitrariness and lack of transparency; whether petitioners are entitled to relief despite participating in the process.
Ratio Decidendi: Candidates cannot challenge selection processes post-participation without demonstrating procedural violations causing prejudice; the recruitment process was transparent and adhered to rules.
Result: Writ petition/Transfer Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' eligibility and recruitment process details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners' arguments regarding lack of transparency. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondents' defense and selection process details. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. issues for consideration and court's observations. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's reasoning on petitioners' claims. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. court's conclusion on the merit of the case. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. final order and dismissal of the petition. (Para 19 , 20) |
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 449/2011 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/8007/2021 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer:
a) “a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to disclose the number of vacancies of the post of Constables in J&K Executive Police which were available/anticipated as on the date of issuance of Advertisement Notice issued under No. DIP/JK-298 dated 08-04-2010 published in the newspaper 'Daily Excelsior' (Annexure 'A’);
b) writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to further disclose category-wise break-up of vacancies against which the candidates have been considered and selected vide Order No.52 of 2011 dated 10-02-2011 published on 12th February, 2011 in the aforesaid daily newspaper (Annexure 'C');
c) a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to produce before this Hon'ble Court the entire record of selection and to declare the petitioners as having been selected against the post of Constables in the J&K Executive Police in the pay scale of Rs 5200-20200 + Grade Pay plus allowances;
d) Or any additional or alternate relief which the Hon'ble Court deems just and proper under the circumstances may also kindly be granted in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.”
3. The facts of the case as averred by the petitioners in their pleadings are as follows:
a) The petitioners are permanent residents of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir and citizens of India. As such, they are entitled to all the fundamental and legal rights enshrined under Part-III of the Constitution of India as well as the Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir.
b) The respondents issued Advertisement Notice No. DIP/JK-298 dated 08.04.2010, which was published in the newspaper Daily Excelsior on 12.04.2010, inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Constables in the J&K Executive Police. The minimum academic qualification prescribed was Matriculation, and the age limit was between 18 and 28 years as on 01.01.2010.
c) The petitioners, though possessing higher academic qualifications (10+2), applied for the said posts, being fully eligible under the criteria laid down in the Advertisement Notice. They duly participated in the entire selection process conducted by the respondents.
d) The petitioners have alleged that the total number of vacancies available or anticipated was never disclosed by the respondents, either in the advertisement or at any stage of the recruitment process. This omission deprived the petitioners of knowledge regarding the number of posts and the extent of competition, resulting in a lack of transparency.
e) It is further averred that the petitioners belong to various reserved categories. Petitioner No. 1 belongs to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) Category, while Petitioners No. 2, 3, 4, and 6 belong to the Resident of Backward Area (RBA) Category. Additionally, Petitioners No. 1 and 2 are Sportsmen and have participated in various events. The relevant category and sports certificates were duly submitted with the writ petition.
f) Despite fulfilling all the eligibility conditions and participating in the recruitment process, the petitioners were not selected. The respondents subsequently issued a Select List vide Order No. 52 of 2011 dated 10.02.2011, published in Daily Excelsio
