BASHIR AHMED MALIK Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner at the age of about 70 years is craving for getting benefits which are not being extended to him by the State Government, though, allowed in his favour, in a duly constituted judicial proceedings by this Court vide its judgment dated 3rd of Nov. 2006 rendered in SWP No. 1547/2000. Why the petitioner is again before the Court, needs to be briefly summarized.

(2.) Petitioner was member of service in J&K Industries Ltd. Process was initiated by the State of J&K for considering suitable and meritorious persons of different services for being promoted /appointed to the Time Scale of J&K Administrative Service (KAS) which service is constituted in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service Rules, 1979 (for short Rules of 1979). The Rule 5 (c) of Rules of 1979 before its amendment which was made vide SRO 472 of 2001 dated 20th Dec. 2001 provided for appointment of members of Autonomous Bodies/Government owned Public Sector Undertakings by way of selection to the Time Scale of Kashmir Administrative Service (for short KAS). The Rule 5 (c) of Rules of 1979 as it existed before the aforementioned amendment being relevant is reproduced as under:-

(3.) Fifteen percent quota was allocated to this group of employees which was called 'Technical Quota'. The process for appointment to Time Scale of KAS was initiated in the year 1997. The cut of date for such consideration was fixed as 1st Jan. 1998. Petitioner was one such person who was recommended by his parent organization and whose case was considered by the Selection Committee constituted in terms of Rules of 1979 along with other eligible candidates. The petitioner on the basis of his merit and suitability was selected by the selection committee for being appointed to the Time Scale of KAS. The selection committee prepared and finalized the select list of fifty persons on 25th Oct. 1999. Petitioner figured at Sr. No. 29 of the select list. The selection list was approved by the State Cabinet on 30th of Oct. 2000 and Government order in sequel thereto was issued on 31st of August 2000 vide No. 1014/GAD of 2000. The petitioner did not figure in the said government order which appointed the persons mentioned thereof to the Time Scale of KAS as the petitioner had retired on superannuation on 31st May 2000. The petitioner represented for being given the benefits which would accrue to him had he been appointed to the Time Scale of KAS. The said claim of the petitioner having been negatived, constrained him to approach this court by filing SWP No. 1547/2000, which as already stated has been decided on 3rd of Nov. 2006. The petitioner had filed the writ petition on the ground that though the select list in which he figured at Sr. No. 29 was prepared and finalized on 25th of Oct. 1999, but the matter was deliberately delayed to confer illegal benefits on chosen few. The petitioner's claim as projected in the writ petition was that he was subjected to arbitrary and hostile treatment, as according to him, in colourable and malafide exercise of power and authority, the respondents dragged on their feet, so as to pave way for appointment of some blue eyed persons to the Time Scale of KAS whose eligibility had come under cloud. The petitioner has also made reference to the Government orders vide which some persons were appointed to Time Scale in the KAS even after their retirement. This court after hearing the parties and considering the matter decided the writ petition in the following manner:-