HC dismisses bunch of petitions challenging selection of NTs

Excelsior Correspondent

JAMMU, Mar 11: High Court today dismissed bunch of petitions challenging result of the examination conducted by the J&K Services Selection Board for testing the “working knowledge of Urdu’ insofar as it declares the petitioners ‘disqualified’ and also seeking quashment of notice whereby written examination for testing ‘working knowledge of Urdu’ has been prescribed as qualifying examination.
After hearing battery of lawyers whereas Senior AAG SS Nanda with AAG Amit Gupta for the respondents, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “when the case of the petitioners is viewed in light of the legal position, this court does not find it a case falling in the exceptions”, adding “although, there is half-hearted challenge thrown to the statutory Recruitment Rules of 2009, but no material has been placed on record to substantiate it”.
“The argument of Gagan Basotra, counsel appearing for the petitioner that with the process of digitization of the revenue record having been set in motion in the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, knowledge of Urdu by a Naib Tehsildar may not be essential requirement anymore and the Rules providing for “knowledge of Urdu” as one of the essential qualification is totally illegal, arbitrary and irrational, is without any substance”, High Court said.
“There is nothing on record to indicate that all the revenue records are now being maintained in a language other than Urdu. The process of selection in the instant case was initiated way back in the year 2015, when admittedly, given the nature of job required to be performed by revenue officers particularly Patwaris and Naib Tehsildar, ‘working knowledge of Urdu’ is indispensable”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said, adding “it is not the case of any of the petitioner that the respondents in the conduct of written examination of Urdu have violated any statutory rules or have acted in derogation thereof”.
High Court further observed, “I am not impressed with the argument raised by the counsel appearing for the petitioners that the statutory rules provide for ‘knowledge of Urdu’, whereas the examination was aimed at testing the ‘working knowledge of Urdu’, adding “Knowledge of Urdu” is a term more comprehensive and wider in its amplitude than the term “working knowledge of Urdu”.
“In nutshell, I do not find any unfairness and arbitrariness in the conduct of Urdu test. Possibly and it may be a fact that mode, manner and methodology as also the standard adopted by the respondent-Board in conducting the written Urdu test might have resulted into advantage in favour of such candidates, who had read Urdu as a regular student in comparison to those, who may have acquired the knowledge of Urdu subsequently, may be, while making preparation for the post in question, but that alone cannot be a ground to hold the selection bad”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said and accordingly dismissed the petitions.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here