Kashmir Impulse Desk
Srinagar, Aug 13
A Central Administrative Tribunal bench in Srinagar has asked Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology-Kashmir (SKUAST-K) to consider allowing a candidate to participate in an interview for an Associate Professor-cum-Senior Scientist post, saying procedural requirements should be considered alongside principles of equity.
The case concerned a candidate for the post in Genetics and Plant Breeding whose candidature was rejected after she failed to submit a printed copy of her online application along with self-attested supporting documents within the prescribed period.
The candidate later submitted the required hard copies before the interview.
The tribunal said the university’s position that the deadline had been missed was legally understandable, but held that the subsequent submission could have allowed the candidate to be considered for the interview, particularly because participation would not itself guarantee appointment.
The division bench, comprising Judicial Member M S Latif and Administrative Member Prasant Kumar, stressed the importance of equality in public employment.
It said employment was a form of national wealth and that equality, transparency, equal opportunity and merit-based selection were fundamental principles governing public employment.
The university had argued that accepting documents after the deadline could amount to an unfair relaxation and potentially disadvantage other candidates who had also failed to comply with the requirements.
The tribunal acknowledged that concern but said the circumstances of the individual case justified consideration of the candidate’s request.
It also took note of her age, PhD qualification, research record and academic experience.
The bench said the university could allow her to appear in the interview “at her own risk and responsibility” if it found her case deserving.
The tribunal directed the Vice Chancellor of SKUAST-K to make every effort to decide the matter in accordance with its observations and within the required timeframe.
It stressed that its decision was based on the particular facts of the case and was intended to ensure that the candidate was not denied an opportunity merely to participate in the interview.
The tribunal ultimately disposed of the plea, observing that the purpose of judicial proceedings was to establish the truth and ensure justice.
