Utt HC | Appointments of waitlisted candidates in AYUSH Department must be in conformity with Rules prescribing life of panel by UPSC

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. and R.C. Khulbe, J. entertained a writ petition against the AYUSH Education Department.

Petitioner contended that in 2013, she applied for the post of Manager State Pharmacy in AYUSH and was called for an interview by the said Department as she stood first in the written examination. It was alleged by the petitioner that she secured the third position in the final list and thereafter the respondent had issued an appointment order to the candidate in 2018. Petitioner was aggrieved by the act of the State as the post was not offered to her despite the fact that the candidates who secured first and a second position in the merit list never joined.

The Court inquired with P.K. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the rule prescribing life of the panel. The learned counsel submitted that he was not aware of the rule framed by Public Service Commission or by Government regarding the period for which a panel of waitlisted candidates would remain in force. He further submitted that even if the life of the panel is presumed to be one year, from the date a letter of appointment was issued in favor of the candidate who stood first in the merit list, the offer of appointment was made to the said candidate in 2018, and consequently the life of the panel would continue to remain valid till 2019; and the petitioner’s claim for appointment to the post of Manager State Pharmacy in Department, had been considered within this period. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, argued that, the Principal Secretary should be directed to consider the petitioner’s representation in this regard and in accordance with the law, within a specified time frame.

As learned Counsel for the respondents had no objection for such an order to be passed, the writ petition was disposed of directing the Principal Secretary, AYUSH and AYUSH Education Department to consider the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law, to pass a reasoned order thereupon, and the State was directed to communicate their decision to the petitioner with utmost expedition within two months of the order.[Divya v. State of Uttrakhand, 2019 SCC OnLine Utt 368, decided on 15-05-2019]

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.