Hiring of ‘tainted’ firm by JKSSB: High court’s single judge bench asked to hear matter afresh
Pursuant upon a writ petition filed by Vinkal Sharma and others in November last year, the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB) had in February this year filed letters patent appeal (an appeal by a petitioner against a decision of a single judge to a different bench of the same court) before the division bench
A division bench of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh high court comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice MA Chowdhary on Friday remitted a writ petition to a single-judge bench with a request to hear and decide the matter afresh.
Pursuant upon a writ petition filed by Vinkal Sharma and others in November last year, the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB) had in February this year filed letters patent appeal (an appeal by a petitioner against a decision of a single judge to a different bench of the same court) before the division bench.
The petitioners had challenged hiring of private company Aptech by JKSSB to conduct computer-based written examinations for various government posts.
The division bench, on Friday, set aside the single bench’s order cancelling the allotment of contract to the agency and maintained that its interim directions will remain in force.
“……Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, we, without discussing the merits of the case, deem it proper to dispose of the appeals and remit the writ petition back to the writ court for deciding the matter afresh. Accordingly, the order and judgment impugned is hereby set aside, the writ petition is restored to its original number and the writ petition is remitted back to the learned single judge with a request to decide the matter afresh. Writ respondents through their learned counsel are directed to file objections/counter to the writ petition within two weeks from today, thereafter, rejoinder, if any, to be filed within next one week. Registry is directed to list the writ petition before the learned single judge on April 5, 2023, when the learned single judge is requested to finally decide the writ petition. Till then, interim direction dated 09.12.2022 shall remain in force,” read the division bench order.
The division bench observed that the JKSSB was not afforded adequate opportunity while adjudicating writ petitions by the single judge bench.
On December 9, the division bench, in its interim directions, had directed that “JKSSB will proceed with the selection process of junior engineer (Jal Shakti department) and sub-inspector (home department). However, the result of the same shall await further orders from this court”.
A day before, the single bench of the high court had cancelled the examination conducted by the JKSSB for the posts of police sub-inspectors and junior engineers.
The single bench judge -- Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal -- had also directed the government to constitute a high-level committee headed by not less than a retired HC judge to inquire into the conduct of the JKSSB.
No compromise on transparency, merit: JKSSB chairperson
Cautioning the job seekers against certain elements trying to malign the process of recruitment, JKSSB chairperson Rajesh Sharma on Friday assured the youth that there will be no compromise on transparency and merit.
The remarks of Sharma came amid back-to-back protests by groups of job aspirants in Jammu and Srinagar over the hiring of a previously blacklisted company, Aptech, by the JKSSB.
“The board is very much aware of your concerns and all efforts will be made to conduct exams in a fair, transparent and secure manner. Do not pay heed to rumourmongers and those with ulterior motives, who are only here to disrupt the processes,” Sharma told reporters here.
He said there would be no compromise on transparency and merit.
“Justice will be ensured. Youth’s ability and merit will be respected and strict action will be taken against all those elements who are trying to harm the future of meritorious aspirants,” the JKSSB chairperson said.
Allaying apprehensions on the hiring of Aptech, he said the agency is not blacklisted as on date, though it was blacklisted in Uttar Pradesh in May 2019 for a period of three years that expired in May 2022.
“I would like to clarify that blacklisting is a restrictive term valid for a period. It has to be distinguished from disbanding that is permanent blacklisting. The present protests seem to be motivated to derail the functioning of the board,” he added.
Sharma said the particular agency is already conducting exams across the country and at the Centre.
“The agency has qualified the parameters prescribed for tendering and was the highest bidder on quality-cum-cost based selection (QCBS) mode. There are specific rules provided in General Financial Rules 2017 of the GoI to deal with debarment/ blacklisting,” he said.
The official said the tendering process has been undertaken strictly as per the rules on the subject.
“It is not that Mr A or Mr B will decide blacklisting, let the court give judgment. It cannot be decided by a few on a road or in a rotary. These persons levelling unsubstantiated allegations have clear ulterior motives,” he claimed.
Without identifying anyone, he said there are certain elements spreading distortion and misinformation on the issue.
“As far as the allegation against the recruitment agency is concerned, the matter is subjudice and the high court will decide on it. The issue will be settled by the law and not by sloganeering. The instant protests seem to be an attempt to influence the high court,” Sharma said.
