The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh recently dismissed a petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision to quash the appointment of Dr. Mushtaq Ahmad Rather as Director of Family Welfare, MCH & Immunization. The Court ruled that the appointment violated the eligibility criteria under the J&K Health and Family Welfare (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2013.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose when the government assigned additional charge of the Director post to Dr. Rather, who belonged to the J&K Medical (Gazetted) Service, not the Health and Family Welfare Service. Dr. Poonam Sethi, a Deputy Director in the latter service, challenged this appointment before the Tribunal, arguing that only eligible members of the Health and Family Welfare Service could hold the post. The Tribunal quashed the government order, directing the appointment of a senior and eligible officer from the correct service.
The High Court examined the Recruitment Rules, which clearly state that the Director post must be filled by promotion or selection from Class-II officers of the Health and Family Welfare Service. Dr. Rather, being from a different service, was ineligible. The Court noted:
"No person shall be eligible for appointment or promotion to any post in any class, category, or grade in the service unless he/she possesses the qualifications as laid down in Schedule-II."
Read also:- Delhi High Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Dowry Death Case Due to Lack of Evidence
The Court also criticized the government for failing to convene timely Departmental Promotion Committees (DPCs), which led to a shortage of eligible candidates. However, it emphasized that this did not justify appointing an officer from an unrelated service.
Key Takeaways
- Eligibility Rules Must Be Followed: The Court reaffirmed that appointments must adhere to statutory rules, and deviations are not permissible.
- Government’s Failure to Conduct DPCs: The shortage of eligible candidates was attributed to administrative delays in promotions, which the government must address.
- No Favoritism Allowed: The Court questioned why an ineligible officer from another department was chosen over eligible candidates within the Health and Family Welfare Service.
The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision, dismissing the petition and directing the government to appoint a suitable candidate from the correct service. The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to recruitment rules and ensuring transparency in administrative appointments.
Read also:- Madras High Court Declines Plea Against Actor Vijay’s Party Flag in Trademark Dispute
This ruling serves as a reminder to authorities to follow due process and avoid arbitrary appointments, ensuring fairness and accountability in public service postings.
Case Title: Dr. Mushtaq Ahmad Rather vs. Dr. Poonam Sethi & Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
Case No.: WP(C) No. 2138 of 2025
