GUL SAMEENA TABASUM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter in all these petitions is common, so I deem it proper to decide the same by this common judgment.

(2.) Order No. SDA/VC of 2007/56 dated 5.6.2007 issued by the Vice Chairman, Srinagar Development Authority is the subject matter of all these writ petitions, whereby Respondent Tariq Hussain Shamas came to be engaged as Planning Assistant on probation for a period of one year subject to the confirmation of Srinagar Development Authority Board. The said order came to be passed in terms of the judgment and order passed by this Court in SWP Nos. 1825/2003 and 118/2005, titled as Tariq Hussain Shams v. Stale and Ors. The Petitioners have questioned the same on the grounds taken in the writ petition.

(3.) The main ground of attack is that Respondent Tariq Hussain Shamas was having experience of six months only at his back, whileas writ Petitioners were having the requisite experience of about six years in the Town Planning Department and were eligible to be appointed on the said post. They made repeated representations, but the Respondents failed to redress their grievance. Further it is contended that the promotion of Respondent Tariq Hussain Shamas is a back door entry and pick and choose case. The said order is in violation of the rules occupying the filed. Accordingly, it is prayed that the impugned order be quashed and official Respondents be directed to consider the claim of Petitioners and appoint them as Planning Assistant.