BACHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second round of litigation was held to be barred by the principles contained in Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Writ petition stands dismissed. Now the present appeal has been preferred.

(2.) BEFORE noticing the controversy which has arisen in this appeal, it would be apt to notice a few facts.

(3.) THE appellant sought a writ of mandamus to the effect that he should be allowed to continue on the post of Chargeman in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -2040 for a further period of two years. This was on the basis of some recommendations made by the Power Development Commissioner and the Chief Engineer Systems and Operation Wing. His contention was that he cannot be made to superannuate on 31.1.1997. It was submitted that his case had been recommended for extension. He was of the view that the direction given by the respondents referred to above asking him to superannuate w.e.f. 31.1.1997 is contrary to Rule 10 of the J&K Work Charge Employees Service Rules of 1972. This prayer of his was made in a writ petition bearing SWP No. 108/1997. This was declined. The writ petition was dismissed. In the above writ petition, as indicated above, the prayers made were: i) That the attempt on the part of the respondents to superannuate the appellant w.e.f 31.1.1997 is illegal; ii) That the writ of Madamus be issued to let the appellant continue in service for a period of two years;