SUHAIL AHMAD WANI Vs. SKIMS MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugned in this petition is a revised/updated seniority list of non-Gazetted staff of SKIMS Medical College-Hospital, Bemina, Srinagar issued vide order No. 80 SKIMS MC of 2021 dtd. 2/3/2021 to the extent it shows respondent No.4 senior to the petitioner in the cadre of Jr. Stenographers. The impugned seniority list is assailed by the petitioner primarily on the ground that as per the information disclosed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 ['the official respondents'], the petitioner and respondent No.4 were having same merit in the selection of Jr. Stenographers conducted by respondent No.1 pursuant to an Advertisement Notice No. 04.2014 dtd. 29/12/2014 and in the absence of any statutory rules or executive instructions governing the breaking of tie, the official respondents should have shown the petitioner senior to respondent No.4 being older in age. It is submitted by Nisar Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that, in the instant case, the aforesaid criterion was not followed and the petitioner was arbitrarily shown at S.No.2 in the select list of Jr. Stenographers, whereas, respondent No.4 was placed at S.No.1. This is how respondent No.4 came to be indicated at S.No.1 and the petitioner at S.No.2 in the impugned seniority list of Jr. Stenographers.

(2.) Per contra, the stand of the official respondents is that, it is true that, in the selection process, amongst others, in the cadre of Jr. Stenographers, the petitioner and respondent No.4 were tied at the merit points '58' Respondent No.4 got 26.8 points in the type test and 31.2 points in the shorthand test. Similarly, the petitioner got 24.4 points in the type test and 33.6 points in the shorthand test. In this way, both the petitioner and respondent No.4 were awarded 58 points each. There was, thus, tie between the two. It is, however, the submission of the official respondents that in the absence of any statutory prescription or executive instructions governing the matter, the tie was resolved on the basis of a past practice which was applied even in the instant selection in the case of Jr. Assistants. Accordingly, having regard to the merit of the petitioner and respondent No.4 in the Graduation, the tie was broken. The respondent No.4 having higher percentage in the Graduation was placed at S.No.1 of the seniority list, whereas, the petitioner with lesser percentage was placed at S.No.2. The seniority list too was prepared accordingly. It is, thus, urged that the petition filed by the petitioner, which is devoid of any merit, may be dismissed as such.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I am of the view that the criteria adopted by the official respondents to break the tie i.e the percentage of marks in the Graduation cannot be said to be irrational or arbitrary.