Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 320 (JK)

Mohd. Sammandar Malik v. State Of J&K

2010-05-31

Mansoor Ahmad Mir

body2010
1. It is averred in this petition that petitioner came to be appointed as Constable/ Guards-man in 1965 and his age came to be recorded as 20 years and eight months against column 8 of Service Character Roll without any supporting document. The date of birth was not recorded in the said character roll but later on date of birth came to be recorded on the same character as 7th of September, 1945 on the basis of school leaving certificate issued by Government High School, Trehgam. Petitioner has annexed the Photostat copy of school leaving certificate with the petition. Further, it is contended that the department after noticing the said entries in the Character Roll ordered for secret departmental enquiry -- came to be conducted by Dy.SP, PHQ, Kupwara, who submitted enquiry report to SSP, Kupwara, and found that the date of birth of petitioner is 7th of September, 1945. SSP, Kupwara, made a recommendation to Dy. Inspector General of Police, Baramulla, respondent No.3. 2. It appears that respondent No.3, Dy. Inspector General of Police, made communication to respondent No.2, Inspector General of Police, Kashmir Zone, Srinagar, vide letter dated 21.05.2002 for necessary orders. Order No. 188 of 2002 dated 08.10.2002 came to be passed by respondent No.3, Dy. Inspector General of Police, and ordered that petitioner shall be deemed to have been retired with effect from 31st of March, 1996. It is apt to reproduce the said order herein: "Pursuant to PHQ directions, received vide letter No.KSTT/Don-3/02/44742 dated 05.09.2002, with IGP Kashmir endst. No.Estt/DOB-IS/93/21580 dated 17.09.2002, sanction is hereby accorded to the grant of retirement of ASI Mohammad Samandar Malik No.273/KP from service with effect from 31.03.1996 the date he attains the age of superannuation." 3. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has questioned the same by the medium of this writ petition. 4. As discussed hereinabove, there is nothing on the file suggesting the fact that what was the basis for recording age of petitioner as 20 years 8 months at the time of entering into service and that entry was not attested by SSP or any other competent authority. It is established that date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 07.09.1945, duly attested by Superintendent of Police. It is established that date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 07.09.1945, duly attested by Superintendent of Police. The record discloses that enquiry was conducted by the department and Enquiry Officer made recommendation that petitioner is not at fault and also recorded a finding that the petitioner was reading in Govt. High School Trehgam and his date of birth is 07.09.1945. The Photostat copy of the said school leaving certificate is on file which is without any manipulation and ambiguity and Headmaster has signed it on 11th of October, 1965, prima facie appears to be genuine. DIG and SP, respondents 3 and 4 have virtually accepted the recommendations made by Enquiry Officer but respondent No.2 without hearing the petitioner, conducting enquiry and any proof passed the impugned order. The finding and recommendation of Enquiry Officer has been brushed aside without reasons. 5. In the given circumstances, the impugned order merits to be quashed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, impugned order No.188 of 2002 dated 08.10.2002 is quashed. It is provided that petitioner has reached the age of superannuation on 31st of September, 2003. Thus, respondents are directed to release service benefits/retirement benefits and the pensionary benefits as permissible. 7. Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of along with all connected CMPs. Record be returned to Mr. A. M. Magray, Sr.AAG.