MANZOOR AHMAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF JK
LAWS(J&K)-2020-1-34
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on January 30,2020

MANZOOR AHMAD KHAN Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Jk Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MAGREY,J. - (1.)In the instant petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs;
a) A writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to submit the entire record pertaining to the promotion of the petitioners as also the similarly situated employees, to this Hon'ble Court;

b) A writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners for their promotion as Head Assistants from the date the said promotion had fallen vacant due to them;

c) A writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the petitioners all the concomitant benefits which will accrue to them on account of the said promotion;

d) A writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the petitioners pay i.e. attached to the post of Head Assistant in view of their continuous officiation against the said post of Head Assistants from the due date; and

e) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the present case may also be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. Hence the same will be in the larger interests of justice.

(2.)There is no denial of the petitioners being working as Senior Assistants in the respondent institute as also their eligibility for promotion against the post of Head Assistants against 25% quota in tune with the mandate of SRO 272 of 2008.
(3.)Mr N.A. Beigh, learned counsel representing the petitioners invited attention of the Court to the office order bearing No. SIMS: 162 (P) of 2017 dated 13.07.2017, in terms whereof, the petitioners have been asked to hold the charge of the post of Head Assistant on officiating basis in their own pay and grade with the incentive of charge allowance as admissible under rules against the available clear vacancies, for a period of six months or till such posts are filled by proper procedure, whichever is earlier. Mr N.A. Beigh, learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are continuing in the said arrangement, however, the respondents are not considering their case for regularization/regular promotion in tune with the mandate of law.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.