Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 157 (JK)

Owais Mehdi Mir v. State of J&K

2017-03-23

TASHI RABSTAN

body2017
JUDGMENT : Tashi Rabstan, J. 1. Through the medium of this petition, petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint him on a higher grade in light of SRO No. 349/19981, as has been done in case of other selectees, who are similarly situated and have been appointed to a non-gazetted post against higher grade in terms of aforesaid SRO. The main facts emanating from the case set up by the petitioner, in nutshell, are that petitioner is a post graduate having done Master degree in Science and also an outstanding sports person of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, having participated in the State, Inter Zonal and National Games Events. It is claimed that petitioner in the year, 2014, had represented the State and Inter Zonal Championship in the discipline of Handball and his name figured at S. No. 30 in the Notification dated 29.12.2014. He also got gold medal in the Inter Zonal Championship. It is further contended that on the basis of performance of the petitioner, he was considered by the respondents for the post of Teacher, in School Education Department by the Government vide Govt. Order No. 166-GAD of 2017, dated 14.02.2017 in the pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200/- with grade pay of Rs. 2800/-. 2. The grievance projected by the petitioner is that respondents, particularly respondent No. 1-Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu, had earlier appointed outstanding sports persons possessing the lower academic qualification than the petitioner, as Sub-Inspector in the Police Department as well as Excise/Sales Tax Department. Petitioner has also annexed the record of similarly situated persons with this writ petition, having lower qualification and have been appointed to a higher grade i.e., Rs. 6500-10500/-, by the respondents. To this extent, petitioner has also made a representation dated 29.12.2016 to appoint him against a higher grade but unfortunately, he was not considered by the respondents. 3. At this stage, Mr. Vikram Rathore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated at the Bar that he would be satisfied in case instant writ petition is disposed of, on the lines identical writ petitions being SWP Nos. 1136/2008, titled "Sandhya Bakshi v. State of J&K & Ors." and 725/2015 titled "Sushil Sharma v. State of J&K & Ors.", were disposed of, by this Court vide Order/Judgment dated 24.12.2011 and 10.03.2015. His statement is taken on record. 4. 1136/2008, titled "Sandhya Bakshi v. State of J&K & Ors." and 725/2015 titled "Sushil Sharma v. State of J&K & Ors.", were disposed of, by this Court vide Order/Judgment dated 24.12.2011 and 10.03.2015. His statement is taken on record. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in light of Orders/Judgments dated 24.12.2011 and 10.03.2015, passed in aforementioned writ petitions, strictly under rules, provided the same are applicable to the case of the petitioner. Let respondents shall pass appropriate consideration order within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order along with complete set of writ petition and copies of Orders/Judgments passed in aforementioned writ petitions, are made available to them. Disposed of as above. Disposed off.