Selection processes must be fair and transparent, with candidates having no vested rights if they participated without protest, respecting merit-based adjustments among categories.

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 3167/2015 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/8639/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

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

a) “Certiorari, seeking to quash the Selection list for the post of Junior X-Ray Technician District cadre Jammu pursuant to advertisement notification no. 06 of 2013 dated 10.05.2013, to the extent, by the medium of it, only 10 candidate (09 against 09 O.M vacancies and one against RBA vacancy) have been selected against 18 vacancies of various categories leaving 08 vacancies unfilled even when the number of eligible candidates was less than the number of vacancies;

b) Certiorari, seeking to quash Select List for the post of Junior X- Ray Technician District cadre Jammu, to the extent, by the medium of it, some of the private respondents, who, on the cut off date for receipt of applications were residents of other districts than Jammu, have been selected in Jammu District.

c) Mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent Board (since the number of eligible candidates is 14 and the vacancies to be filled up are 18) to consider the selection of all the eligible candidates in their respective categories.

d) Prohibition, restraining the respondent Board from recommending the names of the private respondents to respondent no. 1 for appointment as Junior X-Ray Technician in Health Department of J & K Government, till the matter is under the scrutiny of the Hon’ble Court.

e) Mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent Board to prepare the selection list de-novo by selecting all the 14 eligible candidates against 18 vacancies and only thereafter recommend the names of the candidates figuring in that selection list to respondent no.1 for appointment.

f) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

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

a) The petitioners have jointly filed the present writ petition as they are similarly situated and circumstanced. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition, the grounds of challenge, and the reliefs claimed are identical; therefore, the petitioners have filed the present petition jointly.

b) The petitioners are 10+2 pass from the J&K Board of School Education (JKBOSE) and applied under the Open Merit (OM) category for the post of Junior X-Ray Technician in the Health Department of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir pursuant to Advertisement Notice No. 06 of 2013 dated 10.05.2013. The total number of posts advertised was: OM – 09 SC – 02 RBA – 04 ST – 02 ALC – 01

c) The written test for short-listing of candidates was conducted on 12.10.2014. Petitioner No. 1 appeared under Roll No. 1112200117 and petitioner No. 2 under Roll No. 1112200114.

d) On the date of advertisement (10.05.2013), the governing provision for short-listing and selection to non-gazetted posts was Rule 14(1) of SRO 375 dated 21.10.2010, which did not prescribe any mandatory written test. However, later by SRO 342 of 2013 dated 22.07.2013, an amendment was made making the written test mandatory—after the advertisement had already been issued.

e) The qualifying marks for the written test were fixed under Regulation 28 of the J&K SSB (Business & Procedure) Regulations, 2013, prescribing 45 % for OM and 35 % for reserved categories. Both petitioners appeared in the test and qualified under these norms even though the Regul