LATIEF KARIM Vs. UT OF JK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the reasons mentioned in the application, coupled with submissions made at the Bar, the instant application is allowed and the applicant is permitted to file the instant petition without enclosing therewith the requisite Stamp duty, Court fee, attestation of documents, etc. It is, however, directed that the said deficiency shall be immediately made good by the applicant, as and when the Court functions in physical mode Disposed of. By the present writ petition, the petitioners seek quashment of impugned Government order No. 185-PW (R&B) of 2018 dtd. 22/3/2018 issued by Commissioner Secretary to Government with further direction upon respondents that they place the petitioners in the Higher Pay Scale of Rs.5150.008300 (Pre-revised) retrospectively.

(2.) At the very outset Mr B. A. Dar, learned Sr. AAG, raised an objection about the maintainability of the writ petition before this Court in view of the fact that pursuant to the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India, and formation of the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh in terms of the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, all service matters of the Government Employee(s) in the said Union Territories, upon issuance of the Notification dtd. 29/4/2020, issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training), are required to be heard and considered only by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh, "hereinafter for short as CAT" within whose jurisdiction the matter now falls.

(3.) Confronted with the said position, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that changed scenario does not take away the jurisdiction of this court as the same is protected in terms of the mandate of the judgments rendered by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and others reported as (1997) 3 SCC p. 261 and in case titled Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and another v. Subhash Sharma etc. reported as AIR SCW 2002 (2) p. 1105.