High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 01 J&K CK 0008

Ram Lal and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 1 January 2010 · Citation: (2010) 1 JKJ 111

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunil Hali, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

34 paragraphs · 679 words

Sunil Hali, J.—After the outbreak of Kargil War, respondents held demonstration in Udhampur District over appointments to young persons

who rendered service for the army in Operation Vijay known as Kargil War. Approximately, 5000 persons from Udhampur District were selected

by respondents for working as Mazdoor (Labour) for working in three different War fronts in Kargil. Only 200 persons out of the 5000 persons

selected volunteered themselves for rendering the service to the nation at the risk of their own lives and to protect the country from the invasion of

foreign mercenaries and regular Pakistan Army.

2.

After reaching Gumri (Drass), all the labourers including petitioners were directed to report in different units and the petitioners were attached to

6 Para Units, 2 NAGA, 1-NAGA, supplies sector 13 JAK Rifles. Thereafter, petitioners were entrusted with the job for making the supply to the

army in hilly areas. The supply includes Arms and Ammunitions to Army Jawans and Soldiers fighting at front without which it was not possible for

the Army to fight with enemies at War front. Commendation certificates were issued by Lt. Col. Rajinder Singh stating therein that the petitioners

have worked along with Army Troops in most difficult terrains of Kargil area and recommended the petitioners for being given preference for

Government/private jobs keeping in view their services to the nation in hours of need.

3.

Advertisement Notice for recruitment was issued for Group C & D posts and the posts of Mazdoors were also advertised. Petitioners being

fully eligible as per Advertisement Notice applied for the same and were called for interview. Their physical test as conducted for three days and

they were found to be fit, but unfortunately they did not find their names in the select list. Feeling aggrieved of this, petitioners have filed the present

writ petition.

4.

The grievance of the petitioners is that preference should have been given to those candidates who had already served in the War Zone after

risking their lives for the sake of nation. The process of selection being done in secretive manner and without disclosing the select list, appointments

were made. Petitioners seek that they be considered for appointment for the post of Mazdoor in IFOD Unit in Army.

5.

On the other hand stand of the respondents is that recruitment of the Mazdoor has been made in terms of the Advertisement Notice issued.

After conducting physical test and interview, appointments have been made on the basis of interview. Petitioners could not make the grade and as

such were not selected.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

6.

There is no dispute that exclusion of the petitioners has been done on the basis of regular recruitment process. In view of the selection held

petitioners could not make the grade for the said post. However, it is to be noted that for making appointment to the post of Mazdoor, the service

rendered by the petitioners at Kargil during the War time was an essential feature of eligibility. It was incumbent upon the respondents to have

given preference to the petitioners over other persons who have not been deputed in Kargil. I say so because the recommendation was made by

the Lt. Col. Rajinder Singh-respondent No. 2 that the preference should be given to said persons while making appointments. There is no dispute

that selection has been made in pursuance to the advertisement notice for which this Court may have no reason to believe that the selection has not

been made strictly in accordance with law. The service rendered by the petitioners in the War Zone should have been essential qualification for the

appointment which has not been done.

7.

I, therefore, direct that in future, if respondents make appointments to the post of Mazdoor, the case of the petitioners may also be considered

by giving them preference over other candidates for having served in the Kargil War Zone. While considering their cases, any of the petitioners

who might have crossed the age bar, the same shall stand relaxed.

8.

Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.