Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Raju Kumar vs State Of J&K & Ors on 24 February, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Reserved on :02.02.2023
Pronounced on :24.02.2023
LPASW 124/2011
IA No.150/2011
Raju Kumar .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. U.K. Jalali, Sr. Advocate, with Ms
Isha Razdan, Advocate
Vs.
State of J&K & ors. ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, AAG, for No.2.
Mr. Deewakar Sharma, Dy.A.G. for 1 & 3.
Coram:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN, JUDGE
HON'BLE MS JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI,JUDGE
(Tashi Rabstan - Judge)
1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated
30.12.2010 delivered by the learned Single Judge in SWP No.1471/2005 and
SWP No.1188/2008, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ
petitions filed by the writ petitioner.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival
contentions and also perused the appeal file.
3. The claim of writ petitioner before the Writ Court was that since no
candidate was selected in the OBC (Other Backward Classes) Category against
the post of Forest Protection Guard pursuant to notification issued in the year
1996 and the said vacancy remained unfilled, as such the writ respondents
were under an obligation to carry forward the said post under the OBC
Category in the selection process which had taken place pursuant to
notification issued on 14.09.2004.
2 LPASW 124/2011
4. Learned counsel for writ respondents placed a copy of original select list
before the Writ Court showing that since one Tara Chand had already been
selected against the post of Forest Protection Guard under the OBC Category
pursuant to notification issued in the year 1996, as such there was no question
of carrying forward the said vacancy in the selection process of 2004, as the
said vacancy had already been filled up under the OBC Category in the year
1996 itself. Relying on the said select list, the Writ Court dismissed both the
writ petitions filed by the writ petitioner. Otherwise too, as per the admitted
position, the writ petitioner was lacking in eligibility criteria, as he was not
having the requisite certificate of reserved category of OBC during the
selection process pursuant to notification issued in the year 1996.
5. We are also of the view that since the post-in-question under the OBC
Category had already been filled up in the selection process of 1996 itself; as
such no question arises for carrying forward the said post in the selection
process of 2004. Therefore, the judgment relied upon by the learned senior
counsel is also of no help to the writ petitioner.
6. Viewed thus, we are not inclined to take a view other than the one taken
by the learned Single Judge and the appeal is, accordingly, dismissed along
with connected IA.
Jammu (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) (Tashi Rabstan)
24.02.2023 Judge Judge
(Anil Sanhotra)
Whether the order is reportable ? Yes/No
Whether the order is speaking ? Yes/No
