Petition against Aptech sent back to Single Judge for disposal
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 10: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Mohammad Akram Chowdhary has set-aside the judgment of Writ Court quashing entire selection process to the posts of Junior Engineer (Jal Shakti Department) and Sub-Inspectors (Home Department).
The DB also remitted back the writ petition to the Single Judge with a request to decide the matter afresh and writ respondents directed to file objections/counter to the writ petition within two weeks, thereafter rejoinder, if any, to be filed within next one week.
The Registry has also been directed to list the writ petition before the Single Judge on 5th of April, 2023, when the Single Judge will finally decide the writ petition and till then interim direction dated 09.12.2022 shall remain in force.
This significant order has been passed in an appeal filed by the Jammu & Kashmir Services Selection Board against the judgment of Writ Court quashing the exams of JEs and SIs conducted by the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board.
The Writ Court on December 8, 2022 directed Government to constitute a high level committee headed by not less than a retired High Court Judge to enquire into the conduct of Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board for their brazen irregularities/illegalities in changing the terms/conditions of the tender, also as to what weighed with them to award a contract to conduct an examination by an organization which has previously facilitated malpractices in public examinations and accordingly appropriate action be initiated against those found guilty.
The Writ Court had also quashed the contract awarded by JKSSB in favour of M/s Aptech Limited pursuant to e-NIT No.19 of 2022 dated 30.09.2022 for conduct of its various examinations through computer based tests mode.
The preliminary ground raised by the appellants was that Single Judge on the very first date of hearing proceeded to decide the writ petition finally without granting any opportunity to the appellants to file objections. It was vehemently argued by the counsel for appellants that the writ petition was heard only for the limited purpose of granting interim relief as well as for the purpose of consideration of admission of the writ petition, and that the appellants had never understood that the matter was being heard for the purpose of final consideration.
After hearing counsel for the appellants, the DB observed, “in view of the provisions of Rules 14 and 15 of the Jammu & Kashmir Writ Proceedings Rules, 1997 it was not open for the Single Judge to decide the petition finally unless initially the court had issued Rule Nisi”, adding “in the instant case, according to the appellants-writ respondents, on the very first date of the listing of writ petition, they being caveators-writ respondents were under this impression that in terms of Rule 15 they were arguing the matter before the Writ Court only against the granting of interim relief and admission of the petition”.
“Counsel appearing for appellants-writ respondents submitted that it is not permissible under the rule to dispose of a writ petition in favour of writ petitioners without allowing the contesting writ respondents to file reply to the writ petition. Further, though the Single Judge has stated that with the consent of counsel for the parties, the writ petition was admitted to final hearing and taken up for final disposal, yet, the fact of the matter is that at no point of time counsel for appellants-writ respondents had made a statement that the appellants-writ respondents did not want to file reply”, the DB observed.
“We are of the view that the Writ Court had no jurisdiction to finally dispose of the petition without first issuing notice and affording an opportunity to the opposite side for filing reply on merits of the case”, the DB said, adding “we deem it proper to dispose of the appeals and remit the writ petition back to the Writ Court for deciding the matter afresh and accordingly, the order and judgment impugned is set aside, the writ petition is restored to its original number and the writ petition is remitted back to the Single Judge with a request to decide the matter afresh”.
“Writ respondents through their counsel are directed to file objections/counter to the writ petition within two weeks from today, thereafter, rejoinder, if any, to be filed within next one week. Registry is directed to list the writ petition before the Single Judge on 5th of April, 2023, when the Single Judge is requested to finally decide the writ petition. Till then interim direction dated 09.12.2022 shall remain in force”, the DB ordered.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
