Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 7866
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Singh Dogra, J, Ram Mohan Johri, A
Pooja Abrol – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent
Transfer Application No. 106/2025 | SWP/WP(C) No. 239/2015
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rahul Pant, Sr. Adv
For the Respondents: Mr. Hunar Gupta, DAG
Court upheld the lawful selection process and emphasized timely challenges in recruitment disputes.
Headnote:(A) Jammu and Kashmir Self Reliant Cooperative Act, 1999 - Validity of qualifications and recruitment process - The petitioner challenged the appointment of respondent No. 4 on grounds of lacking technical qualifications as per Advertisement Notification No. 47-DPOJ of 2013. The court upheld proper verification of qualifications by competent authority and deemed the process lawful. (Paras 12, 15)
(B) Writ jurisdiction - The court highlighted that judicial review cannot unsettle appointments that have attained finality, especially without allegations of mala fides or misrepresentation in the selection process, asserting that delayed claims cannot revive stale matters. (Paras 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, eligible for the post of Conductress, reported that respondent No. 4 falsely claimed qualifications from a non-recognized institute. Initial selections were contested after several years, lacking immediate challenge or interim orders.
Findings of Court:
The appointment was cleared by the authorities as the selected candidate’s qualifications were deemed valid and the selection was conducted in line with the set procedures.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the respondents complied with the required qualifications during the selection process and if the delay invalidated the challenge.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for timely challenges to selection decisions and upheld that appointments made after due process are protected against belated assertions.
Result: The writ petition/TA is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility and qualifications of candidates. (Para 3 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. judicial observations on long-standing appointments. (Para 5) |
HARSHIT Digitally signed ORDER Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 239/2015 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/106/2025 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer:
a) “Certiorari quashing the selection and appointment of respondent no. 4 for the post of Conductress advertised vide advertisement notification NO. 47-DPOJ of 2013 dated
18.11.2013.
b) Mandamus commanding the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner against the post of Conductress advertised vide advertisement notification no. 47-DPOJ of 2013 dated
18.11.2013.
c) Any other relief which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and properin the facts and circumstances of the case be also granted in favour of the petitioner.”
3. The facts of the case as averred by the petitioner in her pleadings, are as follows: -
a) The respondent No. 3, vide Advertisement Notification No. 47-
DPOJ of 2013 dated 18.11.2013, invited applications for selection and appointment to the post of Conductress in the respondent No. 1 department. The eligibility criteria prescribed HARSHIT Digitally signed was minimum Matriculation and maximum 10+2, with an additional requirement under Condition No. 4 that the candidate must possess a cutting and tailoring certificate from ITI or any other recognized institute. The posts were meant exclusively for female candidates. The petitioner applied under the Open Merit category and submitted all required documents. After the completion of the application process, a list of shortlisted candidates was issued by respondent No. 3 on 05.08.2014, in which the petitioner was placed at serial No. 08. The interviews and practical tests were initially scheduled for 26.08.2014 but were postponed and actually held on 01.09.2014. The petitioner performed well in both the practical and viva-voce and was placed at Serial No. 01 in the waiting list of the Open Merit category as per the provisional select list issued under No.
DIP/J-5112 dated 16.10.2014.
b) Respondent No. 4, who was placed at Serial No. 3 in the said provisional select list, was selected for appointment, but the petitioner contends that respondent No. 4 did not possess the required technical qualification as she had relied upon a diploma certificate issued by Unique Education Trust, a private institute. The said institute is not recognized by the Board of HARSHIT Digitally signed Technical Education of the State of J&K. The petitioner claims that the course undertaken by respondent No. 4 was not a valid technical qualification in the trade of cutting and tailoring and was not approved by the competent authority. Despite repeated representations and requests by the petitioner highlighting the ineligibility of respondent No. 4, no action was taken, and she was appointed. The petitioner argues that she, being fully eligible and meritorious, ought to have been selected and appointed instead of respondent No. 4. Aggrieved by the illegal appointment and inaction on part of the respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate relief.
4. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
a) The respondents have raised preliminary objections to the maintainability of the writ petition. It is submitted that the writ petition raises disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by the Hon’ble Court under its writ jurisdiction, and thus deserves dismissal as not maintainable. It is further submitted that none of the legal, constitutional, or fundamental HARSHIT Digitally signed rights of the petitioner have been violated, and the issue involved is purely factual, requiring examination of qualifications and relative merit. Moreover
