news details |
|
|
| HC holds selection based on higher merit cannot be faulted | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, May 15: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition challenging the selection list for appointment of Medical Officers (Ayush) under the NRHM scheme in District Anantnag, holding that the selection based on higher merit could not be faulted.
Justice Sanjay Dhar dismissed the 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, and the appointments made pursuant to it. The petitioner had also sought a direction to appoint him as Medical Officer (Ayush) under the NRHM scheme in District Anantnag.
The petitioner contended that applications had been invited for appointment to the post of Medical Officer (Ayush) on block-level basis, but the authorities issued the selection list on Tehsil/District-level merit basis. He alleged that the selection was contrary to the advertisement notice and NRHM scheme, and that candidates with lesser merit had been selected.
The official respondents opposed the plea, submitting that the petitioner belonged to Achabal Medical Block and had failed to secure selection on merit. They stated that two male candidates from the same block, Atif Sidiq and Fareed Ahmad Wani, secured 73.20 and 72.56 points respectively, whereas the petitioner secured only 62.81 points.
The Court observed that the selection of Medical Officer (Ayush) was to be made at block level and that the petitioner admittedly belonged to Achabal Medical Block. In that block, four candidates were selected-two male and two female-and all had obtained higher merit than the petitioner. While the selected candidates secured marks ranging from 70.48 to 73.20, the petitioner secured only 62.81 points.
Rejecting the petitioner's contention regarding Tehsil/District-level consideration, the Court noted that even if his candidature had been considered at Tehsil or District level, he would still not have made the grade, as none of the selected male candidates had secured lesser merit than him. The Court described the petitioner's grievance as "wholly misconceived."
The petitioner also raised doubts over the merit list on the ground that the original selection record was not produced. However, the Court accepted the explanation that the original record had been handed over to the then Additional Advocate General for production before the Court, but was neither produced nor returned. The Court found no reason to disbelieve the official affidavit, particularly when it was supported by a receipt.
Finding no merit in the petition, the High Court dismissed it and vacated any interim direction. The connected contempt petition was also disposed of, as nothing survived for consideration after dismissal of the main writ petition.
(JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
