Non-selected candidates have no indefeasible right to appointment despite selection irregularities of others.

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP No.1461/2013 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A No.903/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court seeking following relief: -

a) “ An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to select and appoint the applicant as Physical Education Teacher in District Rajouri in view of cancellation of selection and appointment of the respondents 5 and 6 by the J&K Service Selection Board vide its order No.21-SSB of 2011 dated 04.02.20111 and by Directorate General Youth Services & Sports vide order issued under endorsement no. DYSS/ESTT/14602-8 dated 22.03.2011, w.e.f. the date the private respondents were illegally selected and appointed and grant her all consequential benefits including the salary, allowances, seniority and promotions etc.

b) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to implement the order No.21-SSB of 2011 dated 04.02.2011 issued by the respondents 3 and 4 and order issued under endorsement no. DYSS/ESTT/14602-8 dated 22.03.2011by Directorate General Youth Services & Sports.

c) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case deems fit and proper.

3. The brief facts of the case, as stated in the T.A., are that Respondents 3 and 4 issued Advertisement Notice No. 03 of 2006 dated 28.12.2006 advertising two posts of Physical Education Teacher (PET) for District Cadre Rajouri with the following break-up: Open Merit (OM): 01 and RBA: 01. The applicant, being fully eligible and qualified, applied for consideration under the Open Merit category (Annexure-A).

4. It is further stated that instead of completing the selection process for the aforesaid posts, respondents 3 and 4 proceeded to advertise 09 more posts of Physical Education Teachers District Cadre Rajouri vide Advertisement Notice No. 03 of 2007 dated 05.10.2007 (OM: 05, SC: 01, ST: 01, RBA: 02) (Annexure-B), and subsequently 127 more posts vide Advertisement Notice No. 06 of 2008 dated 28.05.2008 (OM: 75, RBA: 25, SC: 10, ST: 11, ALC: 04, OSC: 02) (Annexure- C). In aggregate, 81 posts under Open Merit category for District Cadre Rajouri were advertised across the three notifications.

5. It is further stated that by notification dated 13.09.2008, candidates who had applied pursuant to the advertisement notice dated 28.12.2006 were informed they need not apply again but should submit representations with photocopy of relevant documents and acknowledgment by or before 18.09.2008 to entertain their claims (Annexure-D). The selection process was thereafter conducted by holding interviews, and the applicant's interview was conducted on 04.05.2009.

6. It is further stated that on 26.02.2010, respondents 3 and 4 issued a provisional select list wherein only 80 candidates were declared selected against 81 posts under Open Merit category, leaving one post unfilled. The applicant's name did not figure in the said provisional select list (Annexure-E). Subsequent appointment notification dated 22.10.2010 (published on 23.10.2010) showed respondent No. 6 as selected at Serial No. 12 under Open Merit category for District Cadre Rajouri, despite his name not figuring in the provisional select list (Annexure-F).

7. It is further stated that during certificate verifi