SAJAD HUSSAIN NAQIB Vs. STATE OF J AND K
LAWS(J&K)-1999-12-2
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on December 21,1999

SAJAD HUSSAIN NAQIB Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) CONSIDERED. Admit.
(2.) PETITIONER has been assigned on stop gap arrangement the charge of Superintendent Industrial Training Institute, Tral, though earlier in July 1990 he was incharge Superintendent, Industrial Training Institute, Ganderbal. Petitioner was to work in his own pay and grade initially for a period of three months or till regularisation (whichever earlier) under Order No. 228 of 1992 dated June 17, 1992 of Director Technical Education, Jandk (Annexure-A ). The petitioner is continuing to hold the charge as Superintendent of Industrial Training Institute (ITI) without being regularised hereto. The Director of Technical Education as also the Commissioner Secretary to Government (Technical Education), took up the matter with Public Service Commission in so far as clearance has to be given by respondent No. 3 to the regularisation of petitioner (Annexure-B ). Again the Director Technical Education respondent No. 2 took up the matter with Commissioner Secretary to Government-respondent No. 1 (Annexure-C), followed by further communication (Annexure-D ). Petitioner made representation to the Director (Annexure-E), but it has not evoked any response. Aggrieved of the inaction of the respondents petitioner has prayed for his regularisation against the post of Superintendent ITI retrospectively from the date he has been given the charge of the post of Superintendent ITI.
(3.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 in reply have admitted the writ pleas so far as petitioner being assigned with charge of Superintendent ITI is concerned. It is conceded that he is continuing as such incharge Superintendent to date. Further it is also admitted that respondents 1 and 2 have taken up the case of petitioner with DPC/psc and that they have been pursuing the matter and are seized of it. The correspondence on the subject has not been denied. However, the respondents canvass that the petitioner cannot claim regularisation as a matter of right, though proposal of filling of posts of Superintendents of various ITIs falling under promotion quota, is under process. All inservice candidates including petitioner are to be considered for promotion against available posts. In para 9 of the reply it is stated: "in reply to para 9, it is submitted that the respondents as earlier submitted are already considering the proposal for promotion of the inservice eligible candidates as Superintendents ITI and proposal in this behalf is under procedural correspondence. As soon as formalities are completed DPC/ PSC will meet for deciding the issue. ";


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