CAT stays finalisation of Conservation Assistant post in Kashmir

24/09/2026

Srinagar, Sep 23: The Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench, has directed the authorities not to finalise the selection to the post of Conservation Assistant, Divisional Cadre Kashmir, pending further consideration of a plea by a candidate who was placed first in merit.
A Bench comprising Member (A) Prasant Kumar and Member (J) M.S. Latif passed the order on September 22 in O.A. No. 1035/2026, Reyaz Ahmad Shah vs Culture. The applicant was represented by Advocate Asifa Rashid Padder, while the respondents were represented by DAG RaisUd Din Ganaie.
The applicant has sought directions to the authorities, including the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Board (JKSSB), to recommend and appoint him as Conservation Assistant against Item No. 055, Division Cadre Kashmir. He has also sought verification of the training qualification relied upon by another candidate.
The Tribunal noted that the post had been advertised under Notification No. 04 of 2020 dated December 16, 2020, with the prescribed qualification of M.Sc. Chemistry along with training in Museology/ Conservation from a recognised institution.
According to the plea, Shah holds an M.Sc. in Chemistry from the University of Kashmir and had undertaken conservation and museology-related courses through Coursera, including courses associated with Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, and the American Museum of Natural History, USA. He appeared in the written examination held on February 2, 2025, and secured 75 marks, standing first in merit.
The Tribunal noted that in the provisional selection list dated January 9, 2026, the applicant was shown as selected in Open Merit, while Respondent No. 5 was placed in the waiting list. However, a clarification regarding the applicant's training certificate was recorded against his candidature.
The Bench observed that the applicant had submitted representations explaining the validity of his training certificates. It also noted that correspondence between the Department of Culture, the Department of Archives, Archaeology and Museology and the Services Selection Board had not resolved the question of accreditation and admissibility of the certificates.
In an important observation, the Tribunal said that equivalence of a course or training was a matter for experts and that the courts had limited expertise in such matters. It observed that the authorities appeared to have passed the issue from one department to another, ultimately leaving the applicant to establish his eligibility.
The Bench further observed that, ordinarily, equivalence could have been sought from the concerned university, which could have communicated with the institute where the applicant underwent the training. It said that denying consideration to a candidate who had secured 75 marks merely because the respondents were unable to determine equivalence would be unfair and arbitrary.
The Tribunal also observed that while the prescribed qualification was mandatory and the recruiting agency was required to ascertain eligibility, a candidate who had qualified the examination could not be deprived of consideration on a ground not countenanced by law. It referred to the constitutional safeguards under Articles 14 and 16.
The Bench issued notice to the respondents and directed DAG Musaib to file a detailed response within four weeks. Meanwhile, subject to the respondents' objections and until the next date, the authorities have been directed not to finalise the selection for the Conservation Assistant post.
The matter has been listed for consideration on November 17, 2026. The Tribunal also clarified that if the applicant establishes the recognition or status of the institute from which he obtained the training, it could facilitate early disposal of the case. The respondents have also been permitted to seek assistance from the University of Kashmir Equivalence Committee to ascertain the validity of the training undertaken by the applicant.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty