Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 21 (JK)

Khursheed Ahmad Din v. UT of J&K

2025-02-03

SANJAY DHAR

body2025
JUDGE : WP(C) No.2114/2020: 1. The subject matter of this petition falls within the definition of ‘service matters’ as contained in Section 3 (q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ the Act’ ), which has become applicable to the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, after coming into force of the Jammu and Kashmir Re-organization Act, 2019 w. e. f 31.10.2019. Section 29 of the Act provides for transfer of the pending cases of such nature to the Central Administrative Tribunal upon establishment of the Tribunal. 2. A permanent Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal stands established at Srinagar with its jurisdiction extending to the Kashmir province and Kargil District of Ladakh and it has started functioning at Srinagar. Accordingly, this petition (WP(C) No.2114/2020) shall stand transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench. 3. Registry is directed to immediately transmit the record of the case to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench, where the parties shall appear on 3 rd of March, 2025. CCP(S) No.08/2021: 1. Through the medium of instant petition the petitioner has complained about violation of interim order dated 29.12.2020 passed in WP(C) No.2114/2020, whereby the respondent No.4 was directed to entertain the joining report of the petitioner as against the post selected in terms of order No.DCB/PS/22 dated 16.12.2020 and complete formalities as requisitioned under law. 2. Main writ petition stands transferred to Central Administrative Tribunal in terms of above order passed in WP (C) No.2114/2020. 3. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case titled Abdul Qayoom Guroo vs. Ajeet Kumar Sahoo and Others , CCP(S) No.144/2020, decided on 29.09.2021 , has, while considering the question as to whether Central Administrative Tribunal constituted under Section 4 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 [“the Act”] has power and authority under Section 17 of the Act to punish for contempt in relation to an interim order passed by the High Court in a writ petition, which was subsequently transferred to it under Section 29 of the Act, held that contempt proceedings in relation to orders passed by this Court in the petitions, which subsequently stand transferred to the Tribunal under Section 29 of the Act, shall lie only and only before the Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act. 4. 4. In view of the aforesaid ratio laid down by this Court, the instant contempt petition is held to be not maintainable. The same is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal by way of an application under Section 17 of the Act read with Contempt of Courts (CAT) Rules, 1992.