The recruitment to the post of Deputy Registrar is to be made in the ratio of 75 by direct recruitment and 25 by promotion and for the post of Assistant Registrar in the ratio of 50 by direct recruitment and 50 by promotion on the basis of merit cum seniority from amongst eligible Section Officers and P.A.1 cum Stenographers in the ratio of 21 respectively.
The appellant University on March 1, 1996 issued an advertisement for filling up the posts of Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar by direct recruitment.
It seems to have called for the documents relating to the selection process and, making its own assessment on going through the records, made the impugned direction.
4 and 5 above respondent No.1 in the select list.
Respondents 4 and 5 were placed in the select list at ranks IV and V respectively.
Note In service employees of the University holding Bachelors Degree in any discipline and fulfilling other prescribed companyditions shall be eligible to companypete for appointment to the post of Assistant Deputy Registrar.
Against the judgment passed by the single Judge, respondent number1 filed an intra court appeal LPASW No.202/2001 which was allowed by the judgment and order dated April 24, 2009 by the Division Bench.
About two years later, respondent No.1 filed a Writ Petition Writ Petition No.1094 of 1998 seeking to challenge the appointments made in pursuance of the advertisement and claiming that persons inferior to him in qualification and merit were appointed on the two posts.
The minimum qualification prescribed for appointment as Assistant Registrar was as under Assistant Registrar A post graduate Degree with at least 55 marks or its equivalent grade.
The Division Bench found and held that respondent No.1 was number eligible to be companysidered for the post of Deputy Registrar and, hence, rejected his case in so far that post is companycerned.
The Selection Committee, companystituted for the purpose, on a companysideration of the merit, suitability, academic qualification, experience and performance of the candidates in the interview prepared a select list on May 26, 1996 in which respondent No.1 was placed at rank XIII.
It was pointed out that respondent No.1 was neither a Section Officer number a P.A. cum Steno.
On the basis of the select list, prepared by the Selection Committee, respondent Nos.
The Writ Petition was opposed by the University.
Respondent No.1, who was an employee of the University, made applications both for the posts of Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar.
Coming, however, to the post of Assistant Registrar, the Division Bench took the view that Selection Committee had number assigned any reason for putting respondent number.
In this regard, the Division Bench stated as follows In the background of what we have stated, i.e. the appellant was entitled, in terms of the numberice, to be companysidered for appointment as Assistant Registrar since he was holder of Bachelors Degree and an in service employee of the University, the appellant was entitled to companypete for the post of Assistant Registrar.
On a companysideration of all the material facts and circumstances, a single Judge of the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition by judgment and order dated May 31, 2001.
The University took the stand that under the University statute the eligibility for appointment as Assistant Registrar for an in service employee was that he should either be a Section Officer or P.A. cum Stenographer and hold a Bachelors degree in any discipline.
4 and 5, found appellant was less meritorious than the respondent Nos.
It was, accordingly, submitted that respondent No.1 was ineligible for appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar.
The only thing that was required to be seen was whether the selection companymittee assessed the merit of the appellant higher than respondent Nos.4 and 5.
He was working only as Head Assistant which post was one step lower to the post of Section Officer in the University.
4 and 5 were appointed as Assistant Registrars.
It was further pointed out that respondent No.1 had only 54.03 marks in the post graduation degree and for that reason too he was number eligible.
In the first place the Division Bench overlooked that according to the statutory eligibility criterion only a Section Officer or a A. cum Stenographer was eligible to be companysidered for appointment as Assistant Registrar and respondent No.1 was a Head Assistant.
4 and 5.
Aftab Alam,J. Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by a Division Bench of the Jammu Kashmir High Court by which it has allowed the intra court appeal filed by respondent No.1, set aside the judgment and order passed by a single Judge of the High Court dismissing his Writ Petition and directed the appellant University to give seniority to respondent No.1 on the post of Assistant Registrar and to pay him the salary for that post from the date respondents 4 and 5 were appointed to the post of Assistant Registrar.
