AB AHAD BHAT Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of an order made by the learned Single Judge in SWP No: 2552 of 1994 disposed of on December 2, 1994 by which the writ petition came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved of this order, the appellant has come in appeal before this court.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case, which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows: - The petitioner/appellant had been serving as Road -Guard in the first instance under the work charge Establishment of the Public Works Department in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. It is seen further that by virtue of the extract copies of the Service record, Annexure -P2 produced in support of the appeal, at Col. 3, he had been working as Gang -Coolie/Road Supervisor on the fixed pay of Rs.345/ -PM as Daily Wager. He had been serving there for quite some time before his services came to be absorbed and came to be regularised on November 18, 1985. It is further seen that from that date onwards he had been on regular permanent services drawing his salary of the post of Road Supervisor. Therefore, on May 30, 1992 he came to be retired by an order made by the State Government. Unfortunately, as on that date the petitioner / appellant having not fulfilled the mandatory requirements of Article 240 -AAAA of J&K Civil Services Regulations of 1972, hereinafter referred to CSR, while passing an order retiring the appellant/petitioner on May 30, 1992, no benefit of pension was given to him. Therefore, being aggrieved of the order of the Government dated 1 -9 -1992, the petitioner filed SWP No:2552 of 1994 challenging the correctness and legality of the said order seeking for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the same, in the writ court. The learned Single Judge having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, at the thresh -hold, dismissed the writ petition by an order dated Dec. 2, 1994, holding that there were latches on the part of the writ -petitioner, in as much as, that if the order of regularisation, regularising his service came to be passed on November 18, 1985, he ought to have sought for the relief immediately thereafter. On the other hand, he did not challenge the said order of 1985 seeking for appropriate relief till 1994 when writ petition No:2552/1994 came to be presented by him before the writ court. Thus, as stated above, the said writ petition came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on December 2, 1994 with the observations stated in the order under appeal.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. G.Q. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the grounds taken in the appeal as well as the order made by the learned Single Judge on Dec. 2, 1994, under appeal.