DB set-aside judgment of writ Court, directs to appoint petitioner in KAS from 2011

STATE TIMES NEWS

JAMMU: In a landmark judgement, a Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta, while setting-aside the judgment of writ Court, directed PSC to appoint Hitesh Choudhary in KAS from 2011.
DB further ordered that petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including seniority, promotion etc. from the date the other similarly situated candidates came to be appointed minus the monetary benefits.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 01.04.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in SWP No.979/2012, whereby the Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner.
The facts-in-brief are that the writ petitioner participated in the selection process for making selection for three services through a Combined Competitive Examination, 2010 conducted by the Public Service Commission.
He applied in the Open Merit category and secured 1220 marks. Three more candidates also secured the same marks. Accordingly, 02 candidates in the order of merit were selected for appointment, whereas the writ petitioner along with another candidate, namely, Ruppali Phull was left out. It was averred that the writ petitioner figured at Sr. No.112, i.e., next after the last selected candidate in the open merit category.
It was averred that the Public Service Commission had advertised 189 posts, however, after selection it recommended only 182 candidates for appointment. It was argued that had the Public Service Commission recommended 189 candidates as per the advertisement notice, the writ petitioner would have certainly been in the list of appointed candidates.
Further certain selected candidates did not come forward to join. Even, the Public Service Commission had failed to draw up the waiting list of candidates in the order of merit in terms of Rule-57 of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Service Commission (Business & Procedure) Rules, 1980 and SRO 387 dated December 1, 2008. Since the writ petitioner was next in merit and there was no waiting list, he filed SWP No.979/2012. However, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence, the present appeal on behalf of writ petitioner.
DB after hearing Sr. Adv PN Raina with Adv JA Hamal for the petitioner whereas Advocate General DC Raina with Advocates KDS Kotwal and Adv FA Natnoo for the UT and PSC, observed that LPA No.263/2019 has already been decided, whereby the order of Writ Court to consider the case of Ruppali Phull came to be upheld with a further direction that she shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including seniority, promotion etc. from the date the other similarly situated candidates came to be appointed minus the monetary benefits. But, it is also a fact that the rank of writ petitioner-Hitesh Choudhary has been shown to be above the rank of Ruppli Phull in the order of merit in the open merit category.
Therefore, the claim of writ petitioner-Hitesh Choudhary cannot be ignored or rejected once the claim of Ruppali Phull has been allowed and upheld in LPA No.263/2019.
Even after accommodating Ruppali Phull in terms of judgment dated September 12, 2023 delivered in LPA No.263/2019, one more post is still lying vacant due to the non-joining of certain candidates and against the said post writ petitioner-Hitesh Choudhary can also be considered, DB order accordingly.
DB further observed that further, since common question of facts and law are involved in LPA No.263/2019 and present LPA No.42/2019, therefore, the directions passed in LPA No.263/2019 shall also apply to the writ petitioner-appellant herein. LPA No.263/2019 shall also form part of this order/judgment. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed. Consequently, order/judgment dated 01.04.2016 passed in SWP No.979/2012, so far as it pertains to writ petitioner-Hitesh Choudhary, is hereby set aside and quashed.