STATE OF J&K Vs. B L CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the respondent writ petitioner (herein after referred to as the writ petitioner) is not likely to suffer any irreparable injury and as he can always be compensated, it is accordingly submitted that he was not entitled to any interim relief. The interim relief came to be granted in a writ petition preferred by him. Even though, the enquiry officer has recorded a finding that as per the date of birth given by the writ petitioner, he stands superannuated w.e.f. 12th Nov. 96, yet the relief has been granted. This relief is to the effect that the writ petitioner shall remain in service at his own risk and cost and shall not be entitled to any salary if he fails in the petition. It is this relief granted by a learned Single Judge of this Court, which is subject matter of challenge in this appeal.

(2.) THE facts in brief are as under.

(3.) THE writ petitioner came to this court earlier also. Two writ petitions were preferred by him. He challenged appointment of the Enquiry Officer, who was supposed to look into the correct date of birth of the petitioner. The writ petitions on the subject came to the disposed of with an observation that the Enquiry Officer can go into the question as to what is the correct date of birth of the petitioner. It was also observed that the finding of the Enquiry Officer shall govern the fate of the intervening period and further continuance of the petitioner in service. It was further directed that till the enquiry is completed and a finding is returned, the status quo as on 4th Aug., 98 i.e. the date on which the two writ petitions came to be disposed of, shall continue to operate. The writ petitioner preferred a Letters Patent Appeal. This appeal can to be dismissed.