Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 647 (JK)

Mohd. Rashid v. State

2017-08-17

B.S.WALIA

body2017
JUDGMENT : Case called out twice. None for the petitioner. I am not inclined to pass over/adjourn the case in view of the nature of the relief claimed. Prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of directions to the respondents to grant promotion in terms of SRO 159 of 2009 dated 29.05.2009. 2. Writ petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioner was engaged on temporary basis in the year 1989 and was regularized as Junior Assistant in the year 1992. In the year 2009, the petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant. He was due for promotion as Head Assistant in the year 2012 but was not given the said promotion though his junior was given promotion despite the fact that as per SRO 159, the minimum qualifying service for promotion from the post of Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant is three years as is the case in the case of promotion from Senior Assistant to Head Assistant and from Head Assistant to Section Officer. The 1st promotion which was due to the petitioner as Senior Assistant was given after 17 years in the year 2009 by the official respondents although the petitioner was eligible in the year 1995 itself in terms of SRO 159 of 2009. The petitioner was eligible for promotion as Head Assistant in the year 2012 and the next promotion as Senior Assistant in the year 2015 which is claimed to have been denied to him in violation of the Rules and Government Orders applicable. It is further the stand in the writ petition that in terms of Government Order No.488 of 2010 dated 26.07.2010, as per methodology for recruitment to the post of Head Assistant and Junior Assistant, the petitioner was eligible for promotion as Section Officer in the year 2015, but was illegally denied the same. 3. Grievance is that despite the petitioner having approached the respondents a number of times for redress of his grievance and also having submitted representation (Annexure-E) dated 01.03.2017, no decision has been taken in respect thereto despite the fact that the petitioner retired on 31.03.2017. 4. Learned Sr. AAG states that in the circumstances, the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents to decide the representation Annexure E dated 01.03.2017 in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable. Statement of learned Sr. AAG is taken on record. 4. Learned Sr. AAG states that in the circumstances, the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents to decide the representation Annexure E dated 01.03.2017 in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable. Statement of learned Sr. AAG is taken on record. Writ petition is taken on board and is disposed of by directing respondent Nos.2&3 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure-E) dated 01.03.2017 in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable and the Government Order referred to above and in case, it is found that the petitioner is entitled to the promotion claimed, then appropriate orders be passed in respect thereto within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforementioned directions, writ petition stands disposed of.