AB MATIN TAK Vs. STATE
LAWS(J&K)-2006-4-37
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on April 03,2006

Ab Matin Tak Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

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." ;


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