Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Reitesh Koul And Another vs State Of J&K And Others on 18 October, 2019
Author: Tashi Rabstan
Bench: Tashi Rabstan
Sr.No.29
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
SWP No.1301/2018
IA No.1/2018
[CM 5964/2019]
Dated:18.10.2019
Reitesh Koul and Another ...Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. P.N Bhat, Advocate.
V/s
State of J&K and Others
...Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. S.S Nanda, Sr. AAG for the
Respondent Nos. 1&2.
Mr. Amit Gupta, AAG for the
respondent No.3.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN, JUDGE
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
01. Mr. P. N Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has instructions not to press this petition to the extent of petitioner No.2 and his name be deleted from the array of party petitioners. Submission allowed. Accordingly, petitioner No.2 is deleted from the array of petitioners.
02. The facts in brief as detailed in the petition are narrated as under:-
The petitioner is a resident of village Sholipora, Budgam, which has been declared as backward area, however, he is residing at Jammu as migrant for the last 23 years and deemed to be treated as bonafide candidate of the resident of backward area and is entitled to seek employment under RBA category. His father possess RBA certificate showing that the 2 SWP No.1301/2018 petitioner is a resident of backward area. It is contended that petitioner has applied for issuance of RBA category certificate in the year 2011, whereupon the official respondents had conducted enquiry for the said purpose and the said enquiry came to be concluded with the findings that the petitioner is entitled for issuance of RBA certificate, however, respondent No.2 had not issued the certificate even after the recommendations made by competent authority and as also the interim direction dated 20.03.2015 issued by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the petition filed by the petitioner bearing OWP No.316/2015. It is also contended that during the pendency of the application of the petitioner for issuance of RBA certificate, the respondent No.3 issued Advertisement Notice No.04 of 2017, inviting applications for various posts including four posts of the Village Level Workers under Prime Minister Package for Kashmir Migrants in the department of Disaster Management, Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction. Being eligible, petitioner applied for the said post. Respondents initiated the selection process in which petitioner participated and found place in the provisional select list, figuring at Sr. No.3 issued by the respondent No.3-J&K Services Selection Board under RBA category, however due to non-availability of RBA certificate, the name of the petitioner could not be recommended for issuance of formal appointment order. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has knocked the portals of this Court seeking indulgence.
03. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ record.
04. On notice, respondents have filed their objections. It is contended in the objections filed by the Secretary, J&K Services Selection 3 SWP No.1301/2018 Board that the issue with regard to RBA certificate of the petitioner has been discussed in a High Level Meeting convened by respondent No.1 on 23.02.2019 and it was decided that selections in respect of RBA candidates shall be put on hold till the Government clarifies the stand with regard to migrant candidates against RBA category except non-migrant Kashmiri Pandits who are not displaced in any manner.
05. It is contended in the objections filed by respondent No.2 i.e., Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner (M), Jammu and Kashmir Government that after issuance of SRO No. 321 by the Social Welfare Department regarding the amendment/substitution in clause (iii) of Rule 21 of the J&K Reservation Rules 2005, the RBA category certificate has been issued to the petitioner vide No.03/RRCM/RBA/19-20/02 dated 08.06.2019.
06. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of the Court to order dated 06.07.2018 passed by this Court by virtue of which as an ad interim, two posts of Village Level Worker under RBA category were directed to be kept reserved by the respondents. He has also produced the copy of the RBA certificate issued in favour of the petitioner, same is taken on record.
07. It is the admitted case of the parties that the RBA certificate has been issued in favour of the petitioner in light of SRO No.321. Even otherwise, the petitioner is a bonafide resident of backward area and had also applied for issuance of the same in the year 2011 before the respondents- authorities. Thus, it is not disputed by the respondents that the petitioner is not a resident of backward area.
4 SWP No.1301/2018
08. In the given circumstances and facts of the case, I have bestowed my thoughtful consideration to the matter and deem it appropriate to disposed of this petition and as such, same is, disposed of, by directing respondent No.3-Board to recommend the name of the petitioner for appointment as Village Level Worker under RBA category, on the basis of merit secured by him in the selection process, provided he falls within the merit and having regard to RBA certificate, issued in his favour by respondent No.2. Let this exercise be undertaken by respondent No.3 within a period of one month from today and thereafter, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall process for issuance of the formal appointment order in favour of the petitioner within a period of two weeks.
09. Disposed of along with connected CMs, on the above terms.
(Tashi Rabstan) Judge Jammu 18.10.2019 Surinder Whether the order is speaking?: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable?: Yes/No SURINDER KUMAR 2019.10.22 13:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document