Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Oct 28: The High Court has directed the State Government to take a call for removing vagueness in Jammu and Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979 so that unnecessary litigation before the Court is avoided in future.
Hearing a petition, Justice Sanjeev Kumar recorded that it is because of vagueness of these rules and coupled with the lack of clarity by Commissioner/ Secretary H&ME Department that; many persons have been forced to litigate in the Court.
“Registry to forward a copy of this judgment to the Chief Secretary of the State for taking a call in the matter so that future un-necessary litigation on the issue is avoided”, Justice Kumar directed.
The Court said had the authorities been vigilant and realized this uncertainty in the Rule and taken remedial measures, a lot of litigation could have been prevented, which would, in turn, have saved the precious time of the Courts.
The aspirants for the posts are now nearing their age of superannuation because of the vague statutory rules governing the recruitment of post in question in the Health and Medical Education Department as also the poor understanding thereof and deliberate exploitation of uncertainty has led to the filing of these petitions pending since the year 2007.
The ground of challenge highlighted by the petitioners in the petition is with regard to the possession of similar nature of experience by the selected candidates and contended that experience possessed by respondent selected candidates, which is accepted by authority, is also not the experience as prescribed in the recruitment Rules of 1979 and the clarification issued by the Government.
The Health Department including the J&K Public Service Commission, have filed counter affidavit and have justified the selection and appointment of selected candidates on the ground that they were the only candidates in the selection process who were conforming to the eligibility prescribed in the Rules of 1979.
“There is no controversy so far as the first two qualifications are concerned. The petitioners and the selected candidates all possess the first two qualifications. There is, however, serious dispute with regard to 3rd qualification, which pertains to the experience required for the post. A plain reading of the 3rd qualification would project a very vague and hazy picture”, the court said
It said the Commissioner/Secretary Health in its clarification, also didn’t indicate that who should be the competent authority to issue the formal order, entrusting administration of a hospital to a Registrar, Demonstrator etc.
It is true that during the process of selection, the matter was taken up with Commissioner/Secretary to supplement the Rule by issuing some clarification, but, as noticed he failed in the performance of its duty and instead of clarifying the position and supplementing the Rule, it introduced further confusion.
The Commissioner Health, Court said, has all along adopted a method of pick and choose for assigning the job of post in question to different others in sheer violation of Rules of 1979.
Court said the Commissioner Health has not specified as to who is the competent authority to issue a formal order in favour of the Registrars to look after the administration of a teaching hospital. The clarification issued by it, is as vague as anything, yet no authority other than the Government in the Health and Medical Education Department could be said to be a competent authority to confer the administration duties of running a teaching hospital on the Registrars.
Court at the end directed the Commissioner Health to take note of the observations made and to take immediate remedial measures to set right the Rule prescribing qualification for the post in question so that un-necessary litigation on the subject is avoided and the posts are filled up in time. “Respondents to comply the above directions within four weeks from the date they are served with the certified copy of this judgment”, read the judgment.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
