Law of jungle prevails in Sagar’s Law Department

PSC selects Law Secretary’s low-merit son as PLO; selection in a sealed cover

Early Times Report

JAMMU, Apr 7: With the firm belief that Chief Minister Omar Abdullah does neither read nor respect Early Times, his audacious establishment is understood to have selected Law Secretary’s son as a Public Law Officer (PLO) despite revelation of a scandal in this newspaper in April last year. A section of bureaucracy, involving officials of Law Department and Public Service Commission (PSC), are said to have played key role in the whole operation of nepotism.

Knowledgeable sources revealed to Early Times that without getting disturbed by revelation of a scandal in this newspaper on 15-04-2011, PSC authorities went ahead and manipulated the selection of Law Secretary Ghulam Hassan Tantray’s son as PLO. Despite clinching evidences of manipulation, Suhail Hassan Tantray was interviewed on 16-4-2011 and placed among the candidates selected for appointment as Assistant Legal Remembrancer/ Public Law Officer. According to these sources, the selection has not been notified and the same was in a sealed cover due to litigation between some candidates and the PSC.

“Despite his low merit, Law Secretary’s son has been selected and the selection would be notified as and when stay order expired”, said a source. He claimed that the officials of Law Department and PSC, who were brazenly conducting the operation of appointing Law Secretary’s son, had been immensely encouraged by one of Chief Minister’s Tweets. CM had questioned Early Times’ credibility in the Tweet when some of his followers had drawn his attention to the selection of low merit candidates as exposed exclusively in this newspaper in March 2011. CM remained stiff even as J&K High Court later terminated the selection of Veterinary Assistant Surgeons completely. PSC even went in appeal to DB but was defeated by the petitioner candidates. PSC has now started fresh process of selection of assistant veterinary surgeons.

As reported in this daily last year, PSC had allegedly lowered the cut-off marks in a manner that Law Secretary’s son, who stood below the cut-off, was called for interview and considered for appointment. Two of the female candidates from Valley had alleged that their names were removed from the merit shortlist for not genuine reasons.

While pushing through the process of appointing Law Secretary’s son, officials of Law Department functioning under Mr Ali Mohammad Sagar created another example of nepotism when Suhail Hassan Tantray was also appointed as the Government’s standing council as many as two times in three years.

Not satisfied with that, junior Tantray also appeared in the competition when Law Department referred some posts of Assistant Draftsman (Translation) to PSC and the process of selection began last year.

While inordinately delaying Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting and sitting over the elevation of Legal Assistants, Law Secretary also referred certain direct quota posts of Legal Assistants, in the highest non-gazeted pay scale of Rs 9300- Rs 34800 with Grade Pay of Rs 4250, to State Subordinate Services Recruitment Board last year. Sources said that an officer of the rank of Additional Secretary, currently posted on deputation with State Human Rights Commission, was assigned the responsibility of selecting the Law Secretary’s son. Sources identified the officer as Tariq Ahmad Banday and said that it was not possible for the subordinate to turn down the desire of his controlling officer.

When SSRB notification came out on March 19^th, 2012, Law Secretary’s son, Suhail Hassan Tantray, was among the 10 candidates selected as Legal Assistant in Open Merit category. He was asked by Law Department to join in the office of Director Litigation in Srinagar.

Let there be a Tweet, if not an inquiry or action, honourable Chief Minister in this rank nepotism in Mr Sagar’s Law Department. For sure, it would be: “bureaucrats’ wards can also have merit to get selected. they can’t suffer for their relation to their fathers!”.

END