AB MAJID BHAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was posted in the Circle office Circular Road Project Srinagar vide order dated 5 -8 -1996 passed by respondent No. 1. He questioned this order in a suit pending before the 1st. Addl. Munsiff, Srinagar and prayed for a temporary injunction on the plea that the impugned order of transfer did not specify the post against which he was required to work in the Circle office in the Circular Road Project, Srinagar. It seems that objections were invited from the defendants in which they questioned the maintainability of the suit in reference to Section 56 of the Specific Relief Act and provisions of Section 80 C.P.C.

(2.) IN their objections the respondent did not indicate the post against which the petitioner was supposed to work.

(3.) ON consideration of these objections, the trial court passed order dated 10 -8 -1996, whereby defendants (Respondents) were asked to clarify the order dated 5 -8 -1996 ˜˜which order did not indicate as to against which post the petitioner had been asked to work." Petitioner™s counsel, Mr. Qayoom, has questioned this order in the present revision petition on two counts. Firstly, that the impugned order had travelled beyond the stand taken by the defendants in their objections. Secondly, according to him, the trial court, after recording the finding that the impugned order before him did not indicate the post against which the petitioner had to work, had committed an illegality by seeking a clarification in terms of the impugned posting order dated 5 -8 -1996.