Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 649 (JK)

Ghulam Nabi Tantray v. State of J&K and Ors.

2012-10-09

HASNAIN MASSODI, M.M.KUMAR

body2012
M.M. Kumar, CJ.— 1. The instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment and order dated 08.05.2008 rendered by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition of the appellant-petitioner which was registered as SWP No. 531/2007. The basic reason for dismissing the writ petition was that the appellant-petitioner did not respond to the advertisement notice by filing an application for his consideration, therefore, he did not participate in the selection process. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant-petitioner, relying upon the endorsement of the Headmaster, making recommendations for his enlistment in the list of the unemployed youth of village and appointment as Rehbar-e-Taleem, was rejected because it could not be regarded as application in response to the advertisement notice dated 08.11.2004. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Rizwan, learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner has argued that an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for amendment was filed to which reference has been made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and the same was dismissed. 3. Mr. Naik, learned Additional Advocate General, has produced the record which shows that there is an apparent interpolation of the name of one Asmat Jan. In the application filed by the appellant-petitioner her appointment was sought to be challenged. 4. It is true that the appellant-petitioner may not be able to secure appointment because he did not file any application for consideration of his candidature. However, once it has come on record produced before the Court that there is some interpolation and some one has tried to secure appointment fraudulently, then it was necessary to allow the amendment and determine the aforesaid issue raised before the learned Single Judge by filing the application. It is well settled that once allegation of fraud and illegal activity is brought to the notice of the Court then it must be probed. 5. As a sequel to the above discussion, we allow the application for amendment and the impugned order and judgment is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge. Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion by the learned Single Judge. These are first blush observations. We request the learned Single Judge to re-examine the whole issue keeping in view the original record which has been produced before us. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge. Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion by the learned Single Judge. These are first blush observations. We request the learned Single Judge to re-examine the whole issue keeping in view the original record which has been produced before us. The writ petition is restored to its original number and the same be listed for hearing before the learned Single Judge as per the roster. 6. The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs.