Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 518 (JK)

Mashood Ahmad v. State of J&K

2016-10-06

RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR

body2016
JUDGMENT : 1. The writ petitioner challenges Government Order No. 102-FST of 2014 dated 28.02.2014 whereby respondent No.4–S. Amrik Singh has been transferred and posted in place of the petitioner, i.e., I/c Project Officer, national Highway Project Batote. The said Government order reads as follows : “Government of Jammu & Kashmir Forest Department, Civil Secretariat Subject:- Transfers and Postings. Govt. Order No. 102-FST of 2014 Dated: 28.02.2014 In the interest of administration, it is hereby ordered that S. Amrik Singh, I/c Range Officer Grade-I(DDR), presently awaiting orders of posting with CCF, Jammu, is posted as I/c Project Officer, National Highway Project, Batote vice Shri Mashood Ahmad, who shall report to Director, Soil Conservation Department, J&K, till further orders. It is further ordered that Shri Susheel Kumar, presently under orders of repatriation to State Forest Corporation, shall remain attached with Director, Ecology, Environment & Remote Sensing, J&K, till further orders. By order of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir. Sd/- (Muhammad Afzal) IAS Secretary to Government Forest Department. 2. This Court showed indulgence by granting the interim order dated 04.03.2014 and stayed the aforesaid Government Order. 3. The writ petition is admitted. Post admission notice. 4. Ms. Seema Shekhar, Senior Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondents. 5. Objections have not been filed. However, counsel for the respondents states that due to efflux of time, the period is already over. She further states that the petitioner has served more than two years in one place by virtue of interim order and now he cannot continue in the said post based on an interim order of the Court. 6. Be that as it may, by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner has served more than two years at the same place and he cannot continue for ever. This is moreso in view of the Full Bench Judgment passed by this Court in case titled Syed Hilal Ahmad & Ors. vs. State of J&K & Ors. decided on 31.08.2015 reported in 2015 (3) JKJ 398 (HC), where this Court has already held that the transfer is an exigency of service and, therefore, by virtue of an interim order, petitioner cannot seek to continue forever. 7. vs. State of J&K & Ors. decided on 31.08.2015 reported in 2015 (3) JKJ 398 (HC), where this Court has already held that the transfer is an exigency of service and, therefore, by virtue of an interim order, petitioner cannot seek to continue forever. 7. In such view of the matter, if the petitioner has not been transferred to any other post in the meanwhile, and if he continue the same position by virtue of the interim order, he is at liberty to make representation to the authority concerned for placing him at the appropriate place as per the transfer policy. Such representation should be made within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The authority concerned shall take a decision in this matter preferable within four weeks thereafter. Till such time, the status of the petitioner shall not be disturbed. 8. The writ petition is disposed of as above.