AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The case of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 3Chairman of District Level Selection Committee,
Pulwama issued Advertisement Notification dated 04.06.2016, inviting applications for the posts of Class-IV in
Animal Husbandry Department, Pulwama (District Cadre). The petitioner being eligible submitted his application
form under Social Caste Category, along with the requisite documents. Respondent No. 3 vide NotificationÂ
dated 07.12.2017 issued the provisional shortlist of candidates who had applied for the post of Class IV , but
the name of the petitioner was not figuring in the said list, despite the fact that cut of marks under SC
Category was 55.00 and the actual merit of the petitioner was 59.48 per the criteria for short listing as
issued under Advertisement Notification dated 04.06.2016.
Aggrieved of the aforesaid short-listing notification issued by respondent No. 3, petitioner made a
representation, before respondent No. 1 on  13.12.2017. It is stated that on the said representation of the
petitioner, respondent No. 1 made some observation/directions to respondents 2 and 3. Thereafter, the
respondent vide Notification dated 27.06.2018 issued final short list of candidates alongwith the date of
interview for the candidates who had applied for Class IV post figuring the name of the petitioner at serial No. 6
under SC Category and the date of interview was shown as 09.07.2018.Â
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 08.07.2018, when the petitioner was heading towards the
Srinagar, the vehicle in which he was travelling was stopped and Roun Domail by a police party who had laid a
Naka due to Shri Amarnath Yatra arrangements and for some other security reasons. It is stated that petitioner
requested the concerned police officials that he has to appear in the interview on 09.07.2018, but the
concerned police officials did not responded to his request. Thereafter, petitioner contacted respondent No. 3
telephonically and appraised him about the entire situation. On 09.07.2018, petitioner again boarded the
vehicle in the early morning from Jammu, but by the time petitioner reached the venue for interview, the same
was finished and the office was closed. It is stated that petitioner  approached respondent No. 3 on
10.07.2018 and he was given assurance that his interview will be taken on 14.07.2017. However, on
14.07.2017, petitioner reached the venue for interview, but his interview was not taken by the respondents.
During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would be
satisfied, if respondents are directed to treat the instant writ petition as a representation and consider the
claim of the petitioner within some stipulated period. There is no legal impediment in granting such relief.
In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and in the facts of the case,
the instant writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No. 3- Chairman of District Level
Selection Committee, Pulwama to treat the writ petition of the petitioner as representation and accord
consideration to his claim within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order
alongwith copy of the writ petition and annexures annexed therein.
Writ petition disposed of along with connected MP, in the above said terms. Â