Help The Kashmir Monitor sustain so that we continue to be editorially independent. Remember, your contributions, however small they may be, matter to us.

CAT quashes J&K Police Sub-Inspector selection list

Representational picture

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jammu Bench, on Monday quashed selection list of the Sub-Inspector (Executive and Armed) in Jammu & Kashmir Police.

The list was prepared in pursuance to advertisement dated December 30, 2016.

A Bench of Rakesh Sagar Jain, Member (J) and Anand Mathur, Member (A) directed Jammu and Kashmir government to prepare the selection list afresh in accordance with law and rules as early as possible, reported Bar and Bench

“The selection lists of the Sub Inspector (Executive and Armed) in J&K Police has not been prepared in accordance with rules and settled law and the validity of the selection lists prepared in pursuance to advertisement notice No. Pers-A-400/2016/75303-403 dated 30-12-2016 cannot be upheld,” the Court said.

The judgment was rendered on a plea by eight persons seeking quashing of selection and appointment of 35 sub-inspectors on the ground that they were “illegally, arbitrary and unjustifiably” selected.

The applicants also sought a direction to the official respondents to consider and consequently treat the petitioners as selected/appointed against the post of Sub Inspectors (Executive/Armed) in J&K Police and consequently grant the petitioners all service benefits with retrospective effect.

The case of the applicants was that the selection of the respondents disturbed the category wise breakup of posts as notified in the advertisement.

It was contended that the quota meant for the petitioners were given to private respondents.

The Court noted that the fallacy in the selection procedure was evident from the fact that though 275 vacancies were advertised in the Executive Wing in open merit, 310 persons were selected.

“As per, the official respondents, the extra selection of 35 candidates belong to the other categories and vacancies in which categories have been corresponding reduced. The procedure adopted by the official respondents is in violation of the settled law that ‘The entire reservation quota will be intact and available in addition to those selected under open competition category’,” the Court said.

The Court, therefore, set aside the selection list.

Advocate Abhinav Sharma represented the petitioners while Additional Advocate General while Amit Gupta appeared for official respondents.