DB stay opreation of judgment regarding quashment of 9 Assistant Professor of Dogri

21/10/2017

Jammu, Oct 20: In a LPA filed by Ganga Sharma & Ors whose appointment and selection as Assistant Professor of Dogri was quashed by the Single Judge.
A Division Bench of State High Court Comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice MK Hanjura after hearing Adv Abhinav Sharma for the appellant, stayed the oopreation and eggect of the impugned judgment.
During the course of hearing Adv Abhinav Sharma submitted that he respondent-PSC issued an Advertisement Notification No. 12-PSC (DRP) of 2014 dated 29-05-2014, whereby the applications were invited for the posts of Assistant Professors in various disciplines including 13 posts in the subject/ discipline of Dogri and further submitted that all the appellants as also the contesting respondents and proforma-respondents being eligible respondent to the aforesaid advertisement. That pursuant to the selection process conducted by the PSC, the select list came to be issued vide Notification No. 02-PSC (DR-S) of 2016 dated 2-3-2016, whereby and where under, three candidates including appellant No. 1 were selected under SC Category and four post under open category were reserved under various court orders and in so far as, appellants No. 2,3 & 4 are concerned they were selected under RBA Category, appellant No. 5 was selected under SC Category and in so far appellant No. 6 is concerned she was selected under ST Category. It is stated that proforma respondents No. 4 & 5 were selected under open category and proforma-respondent No. 6 was selected under ALC Category, however, none of the contesting respondents find place in the select list. That the contesting respondents filed SWP No. 605/2016, through the medium of which selection of the appellants and proforma-respondents No. 4,5 & 6 came to be challenge primarily on the ground that the subject experts associated and invited by the PSC i.e. proforma-respondents No. 7 & 8 did not possess any qualification in the Dogri Subject/ language, as such, they were not eligible to be associated as experts, therefore, according to the contesting respondents selection was liable to be quashed. That since the selection of the appellants was not stayed by the Hon'ble Court, therefore, vide Govt. Order No. 227-HE of 2017 dated 18-04-2017 passed by respondent No. 1, the appellants were appointed as Assistant professors in their respective categories, whereas four posts under open/general category remained vacant on account of various court orders. That despite the fact that only selection of the appellants was challenge by the contesting respondents and during the pendency of the writ petition the appellants stood appointed, yet neither the writ petition was amended nor the orders of appointment was ever challenged by the contesting respondents in that writ petition. That the PSC and the appellants filed their separate reply objections to the aforesaid writ petition, stating therein that the contesting respondents were legally estopped from challenging the selection, in as much as, after having participated in the selection process and having been interviewed by the Committee comprising of the experts, which accorded to the contesting respondents were ineligible on account of non possession of any qualification in Dogri Language. It was further stated and pleaded in the objections that the experts possessed vast experience and knowledge of Dogri Language, therefore, were eligible to be associated as experts and no formal educational qualification in Dogri was required either under UGC Regulation, 2010 or under J&K Education (Gazetted) College Service Recruitment Rules 2008. Despite the aforesaid specific stand taken by the appellants and also by the PSC in their separate objections, the Single Judge vide Judgement and order impugned dated 27-9-2017 quashed the selection and consequent appointment of the appellants by holding that the experts in the absence of any educational qualification in Dogri Language were ineligible to be associated as experts and their vast experience and their eminence in Dogri Language was of no relevance. Aggrieved of the impugned Judgement and Order dated 27-09-2017, the appellants challenge the same amongst other on several grounds enumerated in the Letters Patent Appeal. JNF

Share This Story


Comment On This Story

 

Photo Gallery

  
BSE Sensex
NSE Nifty