LAWS(J&K)-1991-8-14

MOHD SADIQ Vs. STATE

Decided On August 21, 1991
MOHD SADIQ Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks the issuance of a direction against the respondents for fixing his seniority in the combined seniority list of senior Assistants of the Power Development Department from 21.8.1971 by giving him eventual promotions or in the alternative sending him back to his parent department i e. Irrigation Department where his seniority be fixed On the basis of his length of service According to the petitioner he was appointed in superior services in Irrigation Research Laboratory, Srinagar on 17.1963 in the pay scale of 65 120 and promoted to the grade, of 70 -130 on 1.11.1967 The petitioner was again promoted to the grade of 75 -150 m the same Organization from 13 10.1965 and later on promoted as Senior Assistant in the pay scale of 100 -200 from 21,8.1971 and posted in the Town Planning Organization, Srinagar under the administrative control of Director of Designs. The petitioner was thereafter transferred to Power Development Department in pursuance of Govt. Order NO: G -547 -WIP of 1972 dated 22.9.1972 issued by the Works and Power Development Department where he is continuously performing his duties - The petitioner has alleged that he filed an application to the respondent No: 3 for his transfer to the parent department as no lien of the petitioner was kept with the parent department nor was the same extended after expiry of three years. He claims to have requested the concerned authorities for rederessal of his grievances but without any result. It submit that the respondent No: 7 submitted a detailed report and service bio -data of the petitioner to respondent No: 4 with the recommendation to restore the original and lawful position of the petitioner with the combined seniority list of the Senior Assistants of the Power Development Department as hp did not figure either in the Irrigation Department or Power Development Department The respondent No: 3 is also stated to have submitted a report and recommendation to respondent No: 2 vide his No: 21.12 1981 but without any concrete benefit to the petitioner. It is submitted that the Departmental Promotion Committee had decided that the officers who were not actually on the establishment of Power Development Department in October 1969 be treated as outsiders and the cases for their withdrawal be processed. Respondent No.3 is stated to have recommended that there was no objection to the case of the petitioner for fixing his seniority in the respective cadre from the date he had actually joined the Power Development. The petitioner claims that he has a right to be adjusted in the Power Development Department and shown at proper place in the seniority list and promoted to the next higher post on the basis of his services career and length of service.

(2.) DESPITE opportunities granted no counter was filed on behalf of the respondents with the result that their right to file the same was closed on 10.8 1987.

(3.) I have heard learned cgui set for the partite and perused the record of the case