HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Ab Matin Tak
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) ALL these appeals two by private respondents and one ( LPASW No. 29/2006) by the State arise out of judgment dated 23.12.2005 passed in writ petition, SWP No. 1226/2005, and are disposed of by this order.
(2.) APPELLANTS in LPA No. 3/2006 and 19/2006 as also private respondents 2 to 4 were all working as Assistant Engineers in the
Hydraulic Wing of PHE, Irrigation and Flood Control Department. While
private respondents 2 to 4 came to be directly appointed as Assistant
Engineers in 1979, private appellants in the two appeals aforesaid were
promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers some time in 1985. These
private respondents herein, admittedly, rank senior to the private
appellants, (who belong to reserved category) in the re -designated
category of Assistant Executive Engineers. Meanwhile private appellants
were placed as in -charge Executive Engineers and so were private
respondents 2 to 4 later and all these contenders are now working as
in -charge Executive Engineers.
(3.) IT all seems to have started with a Communication No.PW/Hyd -G/170/2004 dated 25.8.2005 issued by Under Secretary to
Government, PHE, Irrigation and Flood Control Department to the Chief
Engineers of PHE, I&FC, RTIC & UEED, Jammu/Srinagar and The Managing
Director, PDC, J&K, Kashmir, seeking information regarding the service
particulars of ten Incharge Executive Engineers (Hydraulic Wing), named
in the communication, has generated the present litigation, which,
originating from SWP No. 1226/2005, has landed in this Court in three
original side appeals, LPASW Nos. 3/2006, 19/2006 and 29/2006.
Three petitioners, namely B. B. Sharma, Ashwani Kumar Sharma and O. P. Dubey, filed SWP No. 1226/2005 against the State of Jammu and
Kashmir and four others, who, like the writ petitioners, were Incharge
Executive Engineers, seeking reliefs, which read thus:
(i) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. l not to consider and promote the Respondent No:2 to 5 or any other candidate belonging to the reserved category against the post of Superintending Engineer by granting the reservation in promotion; (ii) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents No. l to consider the petitioners for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer over and above the head of the Respondents No:2 to 5; With a further direction to the Respondent No. l to treat the petitioners as senior to the Respondents No. 2 to 5 and to fix the seniority of the petitioners against the post of Executive Engineers after their confirmation by applying the Catch Up Rule as propounded by the Honble Supreme Court of India in case titled "Ajit Singh and Others (ii) v. State of Punjab and Others" reported in 1997 -Vol. 7 -SCC -209; (iii) Any other writ, order or direction which this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents along with cost of the petition."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.