HC upholds Ayush Medical Officer selection, says higher-merit candidates cannot be displaced

16/05/2026

Jammu, May 15: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition challenging the selection process for appointment of Medical Officers (Ayush) under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) in District Anantnag, holding that selections based on higher merit cannot be faulted.
Justice Sanjay Dhar dismissed a petition filed by Dr. Farooq Ahmad Sheikh, who had challenged the selection list issued vide No. DCA/NRHM/13/3912-19 dated November 9, 2013, along with appointments made pursuant to it. The petitioner had also sought a direction for his appointment as Medical Officer (Ayush) under the NRHM scheme in Anantnag district.
The petitioner argued that applications were invited for appointments on a block-level basis, but authorities prepared the selection list on a Tehsil/District-level merit basis in violation of the advertisement notice and the NRHM scheme. He further alleged that candidates with lower merit had been selected over him.
Opposing the plea, the official respondents submitted that the petitioner belonged to Achabal Medical Block and had failed to qualify on merit. They stated that selected candidates from the same block had secured substantially higher marks. According to the respondents, two selected male candidates from Achabal Medical Block, Atif Sidiq and Fareed Ahmad Wani, had secured 73.20 and 72.56 points respectively, whereas the petitioner had obtained only 62.81 points. The High Court observed that the selection process for Medical Officer (Ayush) posts was conducted at the block level and that the petitioner admittedly belonged to Achabal Medical Block.
The court noted that four candidates-two male and two female-were selected from the block, all of whom had secured higher merit than the petitioner. Marks obtained by selected candidates ranged between 70.48 and 73.20, compared to the petitioner's 62.81 points.
Rejecting the argument regarding consideration at Tehsil or District level, Justice Dhar held that even if the petitioner's candidature had been assessed on a broader basis, he still would not have qualified, as none of the selected male candidates had lower merit than him.
The court described the petitioner's grievance as "wholly misconceived."
The petitioner had also questioned the authenticity of the merit list, contending that original selection records were not produced before the court. However, the High Court accepted the respondents' explanation that the original records had earlier been handed over to the then Additional Advocate General for production in court and were neither produced nor returned. The court found no reason to disbelieve the official affidavit, particularly as it was supported by documentary acknowledgment of receipt of records.
Finding no merit in the challenge, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and vacated interim directions, if any. The connected contempt petition was also disposed of after dismissal of the main case.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty