- (1.) IN the year 1997, the State of Jammu & Kashmir issued a Notification inviting applications for appointment to various posts, including Technician Gr -III in the Power and Development Department. The vacancies in various districts were assessed and the recruitment was made on district -wise basis. The Notification contained a note to the effect that no application shall be entertained in district cadre posts from the candidates belonging to other districts or who possess the ambiguous permanent residence certificate. The selection was made on the basis of district -wise candidates and the candidates were selected and appointed accordingly. The Respondents herein challenged the selection of Technician Gr -III on various grounds. One of the grounds urged by the Respondents was that the selection should have been made on State -wise and any restriction to make the application to another district was violative of constitutional provisions and this plea raised by the Respondents was accepted by the Lamed Single Judge and the learned Single Judge was pleased to direct that the petitioners be given appointment to the remaining vacancies. This was challenged by the State in Letters Patent Appeal. The Division Bench held that the direction to appoint the writ Petitioners was not correct. However the Petitioner -State herein was directed to prepare the State -wise list and take list of selected candidates was directed to be re -drawn within a period of two months and this is under challenge in these petitions.
(2.) WE have heard counsel for the State and counsel for the Respondents. Counsel for the State submitted that the selected candidates have been appoint as early as in the year 1998 and are continuing in service for The last seven years and if the list is re -drawn as directed by the Division Bench, it will cause a serious prejudice to the various employees who have beet king in the State for a fairly long period. Counsel for the Respondents on behalf other hand submitted that many of these Respondents had obtained higher mark in the selection but they were denied employment as the posts were filled up on district -wise basis and many candidates who had secured lessor marks got appointment in some of the districts and hereby the Respondents were denied opportunity of getting the selection. It is also pointed out that series of vacancies are still lying vacant and many of the post were not filled up and some had not joined their duty and the non -joining vacancies are also left unfilled.
(3.) UNDER the above circumstances, it is just and proper to direct ha out of the notified vacancies, if any of the posts are remaining unfilled either due to want of candidates or non -joining duties, these vacancies shall be filed up by candidates out of the Petitioners who have secured more than it cut off mart secured in the 1997 selection and they be appointed according to the marks secured in the selection. This exercise shall be according to and their appointments shall be case any of the candidates have become over -aged by this time, that criterion shall not stand in the way of their appointment.;