- (1.) A policy formulated by the State of Jammu and Kashmir to employ the Graduate and Diploma Engineers as Stipendaries continues to be there even after 13 years of its adoption. The majority of the cases stand settled whereas some still remain unsettled. The present controversy is one of them. The appellant writ petitioner was serving in the Indian Navy. He passed Diploma in Mechanical Engineering in the year 1983. He retired from the above assignment in the year 1989. By that time, the Government issued an order bearing No. 198-PW of 1989 dt. 4th April, 1989 by which the State Government wanted to give appointment to unemployed engineers. Appellant writ petitioner submits that he was unemployed on the date when the aforesaid order was issued and as such, was entitled to be appointed as a Junior Engineer. According to him, the issue stands concluded in terms of the judgment given by a Division Bench of this Court in LPA 51/91 decided on 15th April 1991. This was an agreed order. For facility of reference, this short order passed by the Division Bench is being reproduced below :- "Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have come to terms and the appeal and the writ petition out of which appeal arises be disposed of in accordance with the agreement by the parties. The following agreed order :- "That the writ petitioners/respondents in case they are stipendary engineers and other stipendary engineers shall be considered by the committee constituted by the State Government vide Government order No. 58-PWD(GR) of 1991, dated 26.2.1991 for appointment to the post of Jr. Engineers (Civil and Mechanical) which were lying vacant till March 15, 1991." In view of the agreement of the parties we pass the aforementioned order and disposed of the appeal and the writ petition in the aforementioned terms."
(2.) The further fact is that notwithstanding the fact that decision was given in the Letters Patent Appeal, referred to above, the appellant was denied the benefit of the Government order referred to above.
(3.) The stand of respondents is that a cut-off date was fixed. The further stand taken is that those who were in the employment of the Indian Navy were not entitled to the benefits of the Government order referred to above.;