Srinagar, July 10, KDC: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) Srinagar has restrained the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB) from finalizing appointments for the post of Field Assistant in the Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment. The ad-interim direction comes amid allegations that the board arbitrarily altered a correct answer in its final answer key without any expert justification or disclosed reasoning.
A division bench comprising Justice Ritu Tagore, Member (Judicial), who joined the proceedings virtually, and Prasant Kumar, Member (Administrative), issued the order while hearing an Original Application filed by an aggrieved candidate, Arfat Hassan, reported news agency Kashmir Dot Com.
The dispute pertains to the recruitment process initiated under Advertisement Notice No. 03 of 2021, dated June 4, 2021, for the Field Assistant posts.
Representing the applicant, advocate Ishtiyaq A Mir contended that his client had appeared in the written examination and correctly answered Question No. 54. According to the provisional answer key released on May 20, 2026, the correct answer to the question was designated as Option ‘B’, matching the applicant’s attempt. However, in the final answer key issued on June 23, 2026, the board changed the correct option from ‘B’ to ‘A’ in an unexplained manner, stripping the applicant of legitimate marks.
The applicant argued that the alteration was unsupported by any disclosed expert opinion, ran contrary to standard academic texts in Environmental Engineering, and amounted to non-application of mind in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Although the candidate submitted a detailed objection on June 27, 2026, pointing out the error, the authorities failed to pass any speaking order, materially impacting his merit position.
Appearing for the state, Deputy Advocates General Rais ud Din Ganaie and Syed Musaib accepted notice on behalf of the respondents and sought time to file formal objections. The Tribunal subsequently granted the respondents four weeks to submit their replies.
While permitting the board to proceed with the ongoing selection process in the interim, the Tribunal put a strict rider on finalizing the appointments.
“Meanwhile, the respondents may proceed with the selection process; however, they shall not finalize any appointment pursuant to the selection process in question without first considering and deciding the representation/objection dated 27.06.2026… Moreover, the competent authority shall afford the applicant an opportunity of personal hearing before passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks,” the Tribunal ordered.
The competent authority has been directed to decide the representation by evaluating the material evidence placed on record by the candidate. The case has been listed for further hearing on August 19, 2026. (KDC)
