Fozia Bashir vs State

Mr. Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J. - Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Board (SSB) issued advertisement notice No. 02 of 2012 dated

07.11.2012, where under, applications were invited from candidates belonging to handicapped category. In the notification there was no further allocation of posts shown separately in respect of different categories. It was not also mentioned in the advertisement notice that the posts under which handicapped category are available and are to be filled up.

The petitioner is suffering from locomotor disability and from hearing impairment. Since the advertisement notice did not classify the categories

individually, the petitioner, in response to above notification, sought consideration for being selected in District Ganderbal as a candidate suffering from locomotor disability, notwithstanding the fact that she is also suffering from hearing impairment;

The respondents thereafter issued one more notification in which in District Ganderbal they notified four posts each for visually handicapped and

hearing impaired and two posts for locomotive handicapped persons. The petitioner was not short listed in respect of locomotor handicapped

posts.

It is admitted at Bar that one post in the hearing impairment category has remained unfilled and SSB has now issued notification for filling up of

the said post.

The petitioner is possessed of B.A, B. Ed qualification and is eligible for being appointed on the post of Teacher in District Cadre Ganderbal

under the handicapped category. The petitioner has been disabled to seek consideration for being appointed on the post of Teacher under the hearing impaired category for which four posts were reserved by the subsequent notification for the reasons that in first notification dated

07.11.2012 no such classification was made by the respondent. The petitioner has been illegally and arbitrarily denied consideration for being appointed on the post of Teacher under the handicapped category' (hearing impairment). Had the petitioner been considered under that category she must have been selected, as one post, admittedly, has remained unfilled because of non-availability of candidate under the particular category.

In other words it would mean that the petitioner would have been selected because she was the available candidate under that category.

Injustice has been meted out to the petitioner, not under design, but due to some clerical mistake. Justice could be meted out to the petitioner

only by directing the respondent-Board to recommend her name to the competent authority for being appointed on the post of Teacher.

This writ petition along with connected IA's is disposed of in the following manner:-

The respondent-Board is directed to recommend the name of petitioner for being appointed on the post of Teacher in District Cadre Ganderbal under the category (Hearing Impaired) as one post has remained unfilled because of nonavailability of candidate. The respondent-Board to make recommendation within one week from the date copy of this is received. The competent authority-respondents 1 to issued appointment orders in favour of petitioner within one week after the recommendation is received from respondent No. 2. Consequently, advertisement notice for filling up one post under handicapped category (hearing Impaired) is set aside.

The selected candidate (private respondent No. 4), who could not be appointed on the said post because of interim orders, be appointed one the said post under locomotor handicapped category. Since the other candidates from same selection process stand appointed, the seniority of petitioner and respondent No. 4 shall be reckoned on the basis of merit and shall figure below the appointed candidates. However, no monetary benefits will be given to them prior to date of appointment.