Wednesday, 5 December 2012

HC sets aside Wing Cdr Waraich's appointment as NIPER registrar

Punjab Newsline Tuesday, December, 04 2012 -CHANDIAGRH: The Punjab and Haryana High Court today set aside the appointment of Wing Cdr PJP Singh Waraich as the Registrar of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Mohali.

Disposing of a petition filed by Dr. Parikshit Bansal and another, Justice Rajesh Bindal said, “There is no material placed even before this court except the bio-data submitted by respondent (Waraich) himself. It cannot be termed that whatever claimed by respondent in his application should have been considered as a true statement in the absence of a certificate from the employer.

“In fact, as is evident from the record, the appointing authority in the present case was misled while considering the entire service career of twenty three years of respondent as relevant experience and awarded the marks accordingly, whereas in the written statement, it stated that respondent was having 16 years experience on a gazetted post.

“Even the record, which was prepared at the time of scrutiny of the application shows that it was mentioned therein that the experience of respondent is 'not O.K.' as the experience certificate is not attached.

“There is no experience certificate produced on record by respondent even up to the date of interview. The selection was being made to the post of responsibility. Casualness in the process could not be expected, as is evident from the case in hand.

“For the reasons mentioned above, the selection and appointment of respondent on the post of Registrar is set aside. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly”.

NIPER had issued advertisement for selection to the post of Registrar on January 29, 2011. After considering the eligibility of the applicants, the interview was held and finally the respondent was selected.

The petitioners were not the candidates for the post, but they approached the court on the plea that the respondent was not eligible for the post in question. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the advertisement for the post of Registrar certain basic qualifications and the experience were required.

Any one holding the qualifications and experience, as prescribed, was to be eligible. In case any candidate was not holding qualification as prescribed, but claimed that the qualification held by him should be treated equal, the authority was required to apply its mind.

Counsel for the petitioners contended that though the respondent was having more than 55% marks in post graduation, his administrative experience was not as was required in the advertisement.

He never worked on the post of Deputy Registrar for a period of eight years. Counsel further submitted that the selected candidate did not have requisite experience after getting his degree of post graduation. “His selection was a result of favourtism. There were other meritorious candidates fulfilling the requisite qualifications and even better qualified, but still were ignored”.

No comments:

Post a Comment