Dismissed¶42

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo v. State of J and K (Health and Medical Education) and Ors.

J&K HC1 Jul 2025LPA/126/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo v. State of J&K and Ors., LPA No. 126/2025, High Court of J&K and Ladakh at Srinagar, decided 01.07.2025 (Coram: Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal) - intra-court appeal dismissed; NRHM Operation Theatre Technician selection: stipulation No. 4 of notification dated 03.11.2007 giving preference to Block residents/below-40 candidates to ensure 24 X 7 paramedic presence upheld; appellant's higher merit points (53.50 vs 50.67 and 49.62) yielded to residence-proximity requirement; writ Court judgment dated 02.05.2024 found free of illegality.

What did the court decide?

The learned writ Court rightly considered the case projected by the appellant and committed no illegality or impropriety in dismissing the writ petition preferred by him. ¶40

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo Vs State of J and K (Health and Medical Education) and Ors. — J&K HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, who secured 53.50 points (higher than private respondent Nos. 10 and 11, who secured 50.67 and 49.62 points), was arbitrarily denied selection/appointment as Operation Theatre Technician under the NRHM Scheme. +2 more

¶23

Court's answer

The appellant was not able to dispute the writ Court's finding that he was a resident of a far-flung village of District Kulgam and could not have been engaged for CHC Shangus in light of the object sought to be achieved through NRHM; hence his higher merit points over respondent Nos. 10 and 11 did not entitle him to engagement at that institution.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

The learned writ Court rightly considered the case projected by the appellant and committed no illegality or impropriety in dismissing the writ petition preferred by him.

¶40

Key takeaways

It is the proximity of the residence of the candidate to the location of the Health Institution which would ensure the achievement of the object of NRHM; a candidate residing at a far-flung distance from the Health Institution cannot serve the purpose and object of NRHM vis-a-vis a candidate residing near it.ratio¶37
No merit was found in the intra-court appeal, which was accordingly dismissed along with all connected CM(s).ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NRHM OTT selection - Block-residence/proximity preference upheld over higher merit points. Appellant (resident of far-flung Medical Block Qazigund, newly created District Kulgam) secured 53.50 points against 50.67 and 49.62 of private respondent Nos. 10 and 11 for eight Operation Theatre Technician posts advertised in 2007; stipulation No. 4 of the notification dated 03.11.2007 preferred candidates below 40 years and residents of the Block where the Health Institution is located, to secure continuous 24 X 7 presence of doctors/paramedics. Respondent Nos. 10 and 11, residents of Medical Block Achabal, were engaged at adjacent CHC Shangus for want of local candidates; the two Qazigund posts went to higher-merit candidates (54.48 and 55.33 points). The Division Bench holds that proximity of residence alone achieves the NRHM object of round-the-clock rural medical service, finds no illegality or impropriety in the writ Court's Judgment dated 02.05.2024 dismissing the petition, and dismisses the LPA along with connected CMs (delay of 328 days in filing earlier condoned).

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

CM No. 3801/2025 in LPA No. 126/2025 CM No. 3802/2025

¶4

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo

¶5

……...Appellant(s)

¶6

Through:

¶7

Mr. Sheikh Mushtaq Ahmad, Advocate with Mr. Syed Uzair, Advocate

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of J&K and Ors.

…..Respondent(s)

Through:

CORAM :

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

¶14

O R D E R 01.07.2025

¶15

CM No. 3801/2025

¶16

01. For the reasons stated in the application, coupled with the submissions made at Bar, the application is allowed and a delay of 328 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶17

CM disposed of.

¶18

LPA No. 126/2025

¶19

01. The appellant, who at present is 48 years of age, had participated in the selection process, conducted by the respondents for the posts of Operation Theatre Technician (OTT), in terms of notification No. DCA/09 of 2007 dated 19.10.2007, issued by the Chairman, District Rural Health Societies (Deputy Commissioner), Anantnag. Eight (8) posts of OTT were

¶20

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶21

¶22

advertised in terms of notification mentioned above, which was superseded by another notification issued by the Chairman, J&K State Health Society on 03.11.2007. Besides other terms and conditions laid down as mentioned in the above notification, it was provided that while making selection, preference shall be given to the candidates below the age of 40 years and the residents of the Block, where the Health Institution is located, in order to ensure the continuous presence of the doctor/paramedic for 24 X 7.

¶23

02. The select list for the above mentioned eight posts was issued in the year 2008, two posts of OTT for Qazigund were filled with the engagement of Zahoor Ahmad Dar and Parvaiz Ahmad Bhat, having merit of 54.48 and 55.33 points respectively. The appellant had secured 53.50 points in the selection process and primarily being aggrieved of the selection of respondent Nos. 10 and 11, who had secured 50.67 and 49.62 points, i.e., the points less than the points obtained by the appellant, filed a writ petition in the year 2016 for assailing the selection of private respondents, on the ground that the appellant was having better position in merit vis-à-vis the private respondents more particularly the respondent Nos., 10 and 11, as such, sought quashing of the appointment of the private respondents by the respondent No. 4 and also for issuance of directions to the official respondents to select/appoint the appellant as OTT under National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) Scheme.

¶24

03. The official respondents came up with their response, stating therein, that different posts including eight (8) posts of OTT were advertised by District Rural Health Society, Anantnag under NRHM vide notification

¶25

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶26

¶27

dated 19^th of October, 2007. The said advertisement notification was superseded by another notification No. DIP/J4146 dated 03.11.2007, which provided that the application may be addressed to the concerned Deputy Commissioners (Chairman, District Health Society) of the undivided Districts and in the present case, as District Kulgam was a newly created District, the appellant addressed his application to Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, in pursuance to notification dated 03.11.2007. It is stated that the select list was issued by the Chairman, District Rural Health Society vide No. DCA/Contract/NRHM/81-87 dated 29.02.2008 and was published in Daily Newspaper “Alsafa” on 04.03.2008. It is also averred that as per stipulation No. 4, preference was required to be given to the candidates below the age of 40 years and who were the residents of Block, where the Health Institution was located, in order to ensure the continuous presence of the doctors/paramedic for 24 X 7. This provision was made in the notification dated 03.11.2007, taking into consideration the presence of doctors/paramedic for 24 X 7 and at the same time, if no candidate was available from the Block, the selection was to be made from nearest/adjacent Block in accordance with the merit of the candidates. The official respondents have given the particulars of private respondent Nos. 6 to 11, however, reference may not be required to be made in respect of respondent Nos. 6 to 9, as the appellant admittedly, has secured less points than the respondent Nos., 6 to 9, but has secured higher marks than the respondent Nos. 10 and 11. So far as the respondent Nos. 10 and 11 are concerned, it is stated that they were residents of Medical Block, Achabal and were engaged in the Medical Block, Shangus (CHC, Shangus) adjacent to Medical Block,

¶28

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶29

¶30

Achabal, as no candidate was available for engagement in the Medical Block, Shangus. The appellant, a resident of Medical Block, Qazigund, could not be engaged in his own Medical Block, as Zahoor Ahmad Dar and Parvaiz Ahmad Bhat were engaged because of their higher merit of 54.48 and 55.33 points respectively. The Medical Block, Qazigund has only two adjacent Blocks where the vacancies were available, which were Medical Block-Verinag and Medical Block-Kulgam, For Medical Block, Kulgam, the private respondent Nos. 7 and 8 being the residents of the same Block, were preferred and engaged in their own Medical Block in view of condition No. 4 of the advertisement. For other Medical Block-Verinag, the selectee Nos. 5 and 6 residents of Medical Block, Qazigund, were engaged, being higher in merit than the appellant.

¶31

04 . Learned writ Court after hearing the parties, vide Judgment dated 02.05.2024, dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant. The appellant through the medium of this intra-court appeal has assailed the Judgment dated 02.05.2024, on the grounds inter alia that the appellant admittedly, was having higher points than the private respondent Nos. 10 and 11, who had secured only 50.67 and 49.62 points respectively, but in sheer arbitrary exercise of the powers, the official respondents selected and appointed respondent Nos. 10 and 11 without any justification and that the learned writ Court has not rightly considered the grievance projected by the appellant. It is also urged by the appellant that bifurcation of the District, Anantnag in two Districts, i.e., Anantnag and Kulgam could not have resulted in denial of an opportunity to the appellant for being considered and

¶32

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶33

¶34

appointed against the post of OTT for District Anantnag on the ground that he was resident of newly created District Kulgam.

¶35

05 . Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

¶36

06 . The appellant has restricted his claim only to the selection of private respondent Nos. 10 and 11, who admittedly have secured less points than the appellant. This is the admitted case of the parties that the appellant belonged to Medical Block, Qazigund, where two posts were required to be filled up and the candidates having higher merit than the appellant, were selected for the said two posts. The private respondent Nos. 10 and 11 both residents of Medical Block Achabal were engaged in CHC Shangus, as CHC Shangus was adjacent to Medical Block Achabal.

¶37

07 . Learned writ Court rejected the claim of the appellant after taking into consideration the object of NRHM, Scheme to make available the doctors and paramedic in rural areas for 24 X 7 whereas the appellant is a resident of far-flung Block of District Kulgam. The appellant has not been able to dispute the finding returned by the learned writ Court that appellant was a resident of far-flung village of District Kulgam and could not have been engaged for CHC, Shangus, in light of the object sought to be achieved through NRHM. It can only be the proximity of the residence of the candidate to the location of the Health Institution, which would ensure the achievement of object of NRHM, to provide medical service to the residents for 24 X 7. A candidate, who is residing at a far-flung distance from the Health Institution, cannot serve the purpose and object of NRHM vis-a-vis the candidate who is residing near the Health Institution.

¶38

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶39

¶40

08 . Having gone through the Judgment passed by the learned writ Court, we find that the learned writ Court has rightly considered the case projected by the appellant and has not committed any illegality/impropriety while dismissing the writ petition preferred by the appellant.

¶41

09 . Viewed thus, we do not find any merit in this intra court appeal and

¶42

the same is, accordingly, dismissed along with all connected CM(s).

¶43

(RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶44

Srinagar
01.07.2025
“Mohammad Yasin Dar”
Whether the Judgment is reportable: Yes/No.

¶45

Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment dated 02.05.2024 of the learned writ Court dismissing the writ petition preferred by the appellant.¶31
Learned writ Court · 02.05.2024
Prior proceeding
Appellant participated in the selection process conducted by the respondents for the posts of Operation Theatre Technician (OTT) in terms of notification No. DCA/09 of 2007 dated 19.10.2007 issued by the Chairman, District Rural Health Societies (Deputy Commissioner), Anantnag; eight OTT posts were advertised, and this notification was superseded by another notification issued by the Chairman, J&K State Health Society on 03.11.2007.¶19
Prior proceeding
Stipulation No. 4 of the notification dated 03.11.2007 provided that, while making selection, preference shall be given to candidates below the age of 40 years and residents of the Block where the Health Institution is located, to ensure continuous presence of the doctor/paramedic for 24 X 7.¶22
Prior proceeding
Select list for the eight OTT posts was issued in 2008; two Qazigund posts were filled by Zahoor Ahmad Dar and Parvaiz Ahmad Bhat with merit of 54.48 and 55.33 points respectively, while the appellant had secured 53.50 points.¶23
Prior proceeding
In 2016 the appellant filed a writ petition assailing the selection of the private respondents, particularly respondent Nos. 10 and 11 who had secured 50.67 and 49.62 points (less than the appellant's 53.50), seeking quashing of their appointments and directions to select/appoint him as OTT under the NRHM Scheme.¶23
Prior proceeding
Per the official respondents, private respondent Nos. 10 and 11, both residents of Medical Block Achabal, were engaged in CHC Shangus because CHC Shangus was adjacent to Medical Block Achabal and no candidate was available for engagement in Medical Block Shangus; the appellant, a resident of Medical Block Qazigund, could not be engaged in his own Block as candidates with higher merit were selected there.¶36

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo v. State of J and K (Health and Medical Education) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shafeeq Ahmad Itoo v. State of J and K (Health and Medical Education) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haji Mohammad Jaffar and Ors. Vs Sh.Alok Kumar and Ors. (Power) owp matter

Akil Dew Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Public Works / Roads and Buildings)

Imtiaz Ali Banday and Ors. Vs State of J and K Th.Chief Secretary(Registrar Cooperative Societies) and Ors.

State Th.Industries and Commerce and Anr. Vs Mir Trader ,Poonch and Ors.

Union Teritorry of J and K and Anr. (Home) Vs Fareed Ahmad Chouhan

M/S Ramcides Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. Th Varughese Mannakuzhiyil Joseph Vs Union of India Th Secretary Ministy of Finance New Delhi and Another