The operation of a waiting list must adhere to merit and fairness principles, ensuring equal treatment for candidates in similar positions.

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 1926/2016 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/206/2022 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer:

a) “Writ of certiorari quashing the order no DIP/J/3936/16 dated 24.8.2016 whereby selection list of teacher of District Cadre Samba made pursuant to the advertisement notification no 05 of 2013 and no.06 of 2013, Item No.503 and item no 605 to the extent the petitioners on the basis of their higher merit has been ignored and the respondent No. 6 to 11 has been selected despite the fact they are less in merit than the petitioners.

b) With further writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no 2 & 3 to select the petitioners on the basis of merit as the petitioners secured higher points as the merit disclosed in the selection list.”

3. The facts of the case as averred by the petitioners in their pleadings are as follows:

a) The petitioners, who are permanent residents of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir and citizens of India, have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, seeking redressal of their grievance arising out of the alleged arbitrary and illegal action of the respondents in the matter of selection and appointment to the post of Teacher in District Cadre Samba.

b) Pursuant to Advertisement Notification No. 05 of 2013 dated 02.03.2013 and subsequent Notification No. 06 of 2013 dated 10.05.2013 issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB), several posts of Teachers in District Samba were advertised. The breakup of vacancies was as follows:

 Under Notification 05 of 2013: 182 posts (Open Merit – 104, RBA – 36, SC – 14, ST – 19, ALC – 6, OSC – 3);

 Under Notification 06 of 2013: 101 posts (Open Merit – 58, RBA – 20, SC – 8, ST – 10, ALC – 3, OSC – 2).

c) The prescribed qualification for the post was 10 + 2, with the stipulation that preference would be given to candidates possessing higher qualifications such as B.Ed., M.Ed. and diploma in ETT/NTT or NET.

d) The petitioners, being residents of District Samba and duly qualified, applied under the said notifications. Their educational qualifications were as under:

e) After conduct of the written examination by respondents No. 2 and 3 (JKSSB), the petitioners were shortlisted for interview on the basis of their merit. A final selection list, including a waiting list, was prepared for District Cadre Samba under Item Nos. 503 and 605 of the two notifications. The petitioners figured in the waiting list as under:

 Petitioner No. 1 – Serial No. 1 (Item 503)

 Petitioner No. 2 – Serial No. 3

 Petitioner No. 3 – Serial No. 8

 Petitioner No. 4 – Serial No. 5

 Petitioner No. 5 – Serial No. 4

 Petitioner No. 6 – Serial No. 5 (Item 605)

f) On completion of the interview process, the petitioners secured the following overall merit:

 Petitioner No. 1 – 63.4214

 Petitioner No. 2 – 63.1049

 Petitioner No. 3 – 60.8502

 Petitioner No. 4 – 62.7079

 Petitioner No. 5 – 62.7884

 Petitioner No. 6 – 61.1198

g) The petitioners contend that several selected candidates under the open-merit category did not join service, thereby creating vacancies that ought to have been filled by operating the waiting list in accordance with Rule 14 of the Decentralization Rules. Indeed, communication dated