ASIF HAMID KHAN Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is a member of Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service. He was vide Government Order No. 20 -GR (H & P) of 1990 dated 16.07.1990 appointed as Additional Trade Agent in Department of Hospitality and Protocol in the pay scale of Rs. 2030 -4050 at Mumbai. He Government order No. HP -TA -21 of 1991 dated 19.11.1991 was paced against the post of Trade Agent in the pay scale of Rs. 2350 -4050 Now Revised to Rs. 10000 -15200). Petitioner's appointment as Trade Agent was regularized vide Government Order No. 1 -GR (H & P) of 1992 dated 21.02.1992. Commissioner Secretary to Government, General Administration department vide communication No. GAD (Ser)KAS -30/93 -II dated 30.07.1998 asked the petitioner to exercise option for being considered for appointment to Kashmir Administrative Service (hereafter the Service). However communication was not received by petitioner as it was addressed to his previous place of posting, i.e. Office of Resident Commissioner, New Delhi. He on his posting as Dy. Secretary to Government Revenue Department acquired knowledge about the aforementioned communication and vide his letter dated 14th July 1999, conveyed his option for accord of consideration for appointment to the Service. He as required in terms of Rule 5(1)(C) Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service Rides 1979, submitted requisite undertaking alongside the aforementioned letter.

(2.) THE procedure prescribed for appointment of eligible officers to the Service involves consideration of such officers by Selection Committee constituted by the Government. The State Government as a sequel to the process initiated on 13th July 1998 by soliciting response from eligible officers appointed the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee, so constituted held its sitting on 15th July, 1999. Petitioner was asked by Commissioner Secretary to Government General Administration Department, to appear before the Selection Committee for interview as required under rules. He accordingly, appeared at the venue of Selection committee, deliberations but was not called for interview on the ground that his annual Performance Reports (APR's), were not received from Commissioner Secretary to Government, General Administration Department. Petitioner under bona fide belief that he would be called for interview by Selection Committee, as and when his Annual Performance Report (APRs) were made available to the Committee, waited for instructions from the Selection Committee.

(3.) AGGRIEVED with failure of respondents to accord consideration to his appointment to the Service and appointment of his 50 colleagues to the service petitioner on March 15th 2001, submitted a representation to respondent No. 1. The representation was duly forwarded by Revenue Minister of the State Government. This was followed by representation dated 14.01.2002, also forwarded by the Revenue Minister vide his No. HRM/597/2002 dated 18.02.2002. When successive representations did not evoke any response, petitioner addressed representation duly forwarded by Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department, to respondent No. 1.