SUHAIL ANWAR KHAN Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
LAWS(J&K)-2020-3-25
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on March 09,2020

Suhail Anwar Khan Appellant
VERSUS
Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KUNAL NANDA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S N PANIKAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Ali Mohammad Magrey,J. - (1.)In the instant petition, the petitioners have prayed for the grant of following relief(s) in their favour:
'(i) Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to absorb the petitioners along with other similarly circumstances persons in respondent Motor Vehicles Department and till then not to disturb the status of the petitioners in the respondent department and allow them to continue their services in the respondent department has been done by the respondents in case of some blue eyed persons.

(ii) Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to release the pending salary/ C.P. Fund of the petitioners for the months of November and December 2019 and January and February 2020 along with the pending salary of 2 months (January and February) of the year 2015.

(iii) Any other appropriate relief, writ or order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.'

(2.)The relief claimed by the petitioners, as detailed out hereinabove, is based on their deployment in the Motor Vehicles Department pursuant to order No. JKSRTC/GM/A/571 dated 29th of May, 2009, followed by Government Order Nos. 02-TR of 2013 dated 10th of November, 2013; 21-TR of 2016 dated 26th of February, 2016; 39-TR of 2016 dated 4th of April, 2016; 56-TR of 2017 dated 20th of July, 2017; and 84-TR of 2017 dated 26th of October, 2017. The petitioners, earlier in point of time, claim to have filed SWP No. 1940/2018; IA No. 01/2018 for seeking the same relief claimed herein this petition. The said petition, as stated, came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 16th of August, 2018, directing the respondents to accord consideration to the claim of the petitioners as detailed in the said petition. The petitioners contend that despite aforesaid directions passed by this Court, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioners.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioners, when pointedly asked as to how the present petition for the relief claimed is maintainable even on merits when the petitioners, admittedly, are holding their substantive position in the State Road Transport Corporation and are only, at the most, on deputation in the Motor Vehicles Department, could not convince the Court.
;


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