01Facts
The J&K Energy Development Agency (JAKEDA) issued Advertisement Notices in 2017 to fill 77 vacancies for Assistant and Junior Engineers
p. 4, para 6After an external agency (M/s LM Energy and Software Private Limited) conducted the written examinations, the UT administration issued Order No. 08-JAKEDA of 2019 cancelling the entire recruitment process.
p. 2, para 1The cancellation was based on the ground that the testing agency had been engaged without a Request for Proposal (RFP) or Expression of Interest (EOI), violating competitive transparency
p. 4, para 6The respondents challenged this cancellation, and the Writ Court quashed the order, directing the UT to conclude the selection process
p. 2, para 1The UT appealed, further arguing that the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, necessitated a fresh reservation roster
pp. 2-3, para 2-302Issues
i.1. Whether a procedural lapse in the engagement of a testing agency constitutes a "cogent" ground to cancel a recruitment process that has reached an advanced stage
p. 7, para 11ii.2. Whether the administration can justify a cancellation order in court using fresh grounds (such as new reservation policies) not mentioned in the original order
pp. 8-9, para 1203Law Applied
The Court applied the principle from Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India, establishing that while successful candidates have no indefeasible right to appointment, the State cannot act arbitrarily and must provide bona fide reasons for not filling vacancies
pp. 5-6, para 9(A)It relied on East Coast Railway v. Mahadev Appa Rao, which subjects the decision to cancel recruitment to judicial review to ensure it is not arbitrary
p. 6, para 9(B)Under Partha Das v. State of Tripura, the court emphasized that candidates have a legitimate expectation that an advanced recruitment process will be completed fairly
pp. 6-7, para 9(C)Finally, the court applied the doctrine from Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, which dictates that the validity of a statutory order must be judged solely by the reasons recorded therein and cannot be supplemented by subsequent explanations or affidavits
p. 9, para 1204Reasoning
The Court reasoned that the sole reason in the cancellation order was the non-issuance of an RFP/EOI for the testing agency
p. 5, para 7Since there were no allegations of fraud, malpractice, or incompetence against the agency or the candidates, the Court deemed this a mere technicality that did not justify scrapping an untainted process at an advanced stage
p. 8, para 11The Court found the reason for cancellation to be "illusory"
p. 8, para 11Regarding the UT’s new argument concerning the J&K Reorganisation Act and reservation rosters, the Court rejected it on the basis that these grounds were absent from the original 2019 order. Following Mohinder Singh Gill, the Court held that the State cannot use fresh legal developments as a "shield" to validate an initially flawed executive action
pp. 8-9, para 1205Holding
The Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Writ Court's judgment, finding the cancellation of the recruitment process arbitrary and devoid of merit
pp. 9-10, para 13, 15It held that the procedural omission in hiring the agency was not a cogent ground for cancellation in the absence of substantive irregularities
p. 8, para 11The appellants were directed to conclude the selection process as previously ordered
p. 2, para 1Original Court PDF
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT)vsSAMEER AHMAD KHAN AND ORS.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
