1. Criteria for making selection for the post of Draftsman in Civil, is stated to have been changed by the J&K Services Selection Board (herein after referred to as "Board") after selection process was initiated by it. The controversy raised in present petition relates to the fact as to whether criteria for the selection can be changed after advertisement notice has been issued and process of selection has been initiated. It is this issue which requires to be determined in this writ petition. In order to appreciate this controversy following facts are required to be noticed.

2. Vide its advertisement notice No. 07 of 2005 dated 20th November 2005, applications were invited from eligible candidates for the post of Draftsman (Civil), who were not having the age below 18 years And above 37 years as on 1st January 2005 and possess the qualification of Two Years Draftsman Training Course Certificate/ Diploma from any Government Recognized Institute. The cut-off date for receipt applications was 26th December 2005. The posts available for Kashmir Division for selection were 82 in Open Merit Category, 12 in SC Category, 14 in ST Category, 28 in RBA Category, 4 in ALC Category and 2 in SOC Category. Satisfying eligibility set out in the advertisement notice, the petitioners applied for the said post. The criterion for making selection was as under:-

i) Academic Qualification:	80 points
ii) Viva Voce:	20 points

Interviews were conducted on 30th October, 1st and 2nd November 2006.

It seems that after interview was conducted, the Board vide its meeting held on 28th of November 2006, changed the criteria for making selection as under:-

i) Academic Qualification:	70 points
ii) Viva Voce:	30 points

It be noted that the present petitions were clubbed together for being disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of the parties as directed by this Court on 20th of March 2010.

3. The contention of the petitioners is that after having notified the selection criteria, the rules for selection cannot be changed midstream. The option with the respondents in case of change of criteria was to withdraw the advertisement notice and issue fresh advertisement notice on the basis of the changed criteria. The underlining idea of changing the criteria was to convert merit of the petitioners into demerit. It is contended that the manner in which the marks in the viva voce have been awarded in favour of the candidates, as disclosed in the reply to the writ petition, clearly reflect this fact. Other contentions raised by the petitioners are that some of the forms have been accepted, which were incomplete and were not inconsonance with the eligibility set out in the advertisement notice.

4. On the other hand stand of the respondents is that the eligibility set out in the advertisement notice was in consonance with the Subordinate Recruitment Rules 1997, notified vide SRO 180 dated 26.06.1997. The underlining idea of changing criteria was on account of the fact that the number of papers prescribed for two years Diploma Course and the certificate course is substantially uneven and the candidates who have qualified the certificate course in the Draftsman trade for Institutions located outside the State have obtained marks which are generally much higher in terms of percentage vis-a-vis those who have qualified the diploma from State Board of Technical Education. The medium of teaching also offers a difference between the two sets of candidates and so is the case with the content. It was also observed that some private institutions who have been offering two years certificate course and have been awarding marks rather generously were put in advantageous position on the basis of criteria reflected at the time of issuance of advertisement notice. In view of this backdrop it was found necessary, in order to give level playing field to those candidates, who have qualified from State Board of Technical education, to reduce the marks in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document