STATE OF J&K THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT & ORS. Vs. WALI MOHAMMAD MIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against judgment rendered on 06.06.2008 in a batch of writ petitions bearing SWP Nos. 828/2005, 996/2005, 825/2005, 449/2005, 562/2005, 1969/2003, 348/2004, 1631/2004, 735/2005, 436/2005 & 411/2005, whereby and where under all the impugned orders therein have been quashed.

(2.) Facts germane to the disposal of this Letters Patent Appeal may be noticed briefly.

(3.) In the year 2004, Government embarked upon a process of periodical review of the performance of officers/officials and directed the General Administration Department to take appropriate action on the basis of entries made in APRs of the officers/officials under its control. This was done with the avowed purpose of bringing efficiency in the working of the Government by weeding out deadwood from public administration. A Committee was constituted for identifying the undesirable officers/officials and for recommending their cases for appropriate action. The requisite information was to be submitted in prescribed proforma with instructions to refer cases of those who had become ineffective or had outlived their utility along with their APRs and a general assessment about their reputation. Proforma prescribed for furnishing information required APRs for five preceding years along with adverse remarks, if any, and details of works/contracts allotted by the officer which had become the subject of departmental inquiry/investigation by Vigilance Department or invited adverse comments from Audit and Inspection Department along with a brief report by concerned Administrative Secretary as to whether the officer/official had outlived his utility. Subsequently, the constitution of the Committee was partially modified and the substituted Committee was to comprise of the Chief Secretary, Financial Commissioner (Finance) and Commissioner Secretary Law Department. The Committee met on 02.07.2003 and formulated the guidelines for undertaking the task assigned to it. The Committee considered the proposals as finalised by the departments and on the basis of inputs from various departments and information in regard to general reputation of officers/officials gathered from a cross section of the people recommended premature retirement of numerous persons including the respondent herein. The Government decision stemming out of the administrative process culminated in passing of orders of premature/compulsory retirement against the identified officers/officials, who assailed such orders by filing a batch of writ petitions which were allowed by the writ Court in terms of impugned judgment dated 06.06.2008 resulting in quashing of the orders impugned therein.