Srinagar, Aug 13: Observing that apart from formalities, there is concept of equity in law, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in Srinagar has asked the Sher-i-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Kashmir (SKUAST-K) to permit a candidate to participate in the interview for the post of Associate Professor-cum-Senior Scientist (Genetics and Plant Breeding).
A division bench comprising Judicial Member, M S Latif, and Administrative Member, Prasant Kumar observed that employment is a national wealth which must be shared equally among citizens as adherence to equality in public employment remains a basic feature of the constitution.
“Law is no more res integra and there is no doubt that employment is a national wealth that must be shared by all citizens and adherence to the rule of equality in public employment is a basic feature of our Constitution and the rule of law is the core of our constitution,” it said.
The tribunal observed that the controversy herein falls squarely within the domain of SKUAST-K, saying however, in addition to conforming to the rules and regulations, there is a concept of equity in law, as transparency, equal opportunity, and merit-based selection is the hallmark and bedrock of the constitution.
The aggrieved candidate had challenged the SKUAST-K order dated August 11, 2026, whereby her candidature was rejected for allegedly failing to comply with the requirement of submitting a printout of the online application along with self-attested copies of supporting documents, certificates and testimonials.
The issue to decide for the tribunal was whether a candidate could be deprived of consideration merely for not submitting hard copies of documents that had already been furnished online, and whether such a stand could be sustained in law.
The varsity argued that the candidate had missed the prescribed deadline and that allowing her to submit the documents after the cut-off date would amount to granting her an unfair relaxation, potentially discriminating against other candidates who may also have missed the deadline.
The bench agreed with the university’s proposition but noted that the candidate had subsequently submitted a representation along with all the required hard copies before the interview.
It observed that she could, therefore, have been considered for participation in the interview, particularly as mere participation would not confer any right of selection or appointment.
The tribunal said the varsity could consider the candidate’s case in view of the principles of transparency, equal opportunity and merit-based selection, observing that the concept of equity must also be kept in mind alongside procedural requirements.
“In addition to conforming to the rules and regulations, there is a concept of equity in law,” the bench observed, stressing that transparency, equal opportunity and merit-based selection constitute the hallmark of the constitutional scheme.
The tribunal also took note of submissions regarding the candidate’s age, PhD qualification, research credentials and academic experience.
It observed that, having reached such a stage in her academic career, she must have worked hard and “dreamt, at least, to have been considered for her participation in the interview.”
The tribunal said the university was well within its rights to allow her to participate in the interview, “at her own risk and responsibility,” if it found her case deserving of consideration.
It further requested the Vice Chancellor SKUAST-K to make every endeavour to decide the matter in accordance with its directions and within the required timeframe.
The bench emphasised that its order was passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case so that the candidate was not deprived, at least, of her right to be considered for participation in the interview.
“The ultimate object of judicial proceedings is to discern the truth and do justice,” the tribunal observed while disposing of the plea.
