DR JAVED CHOWDHARY Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 24th July 2017 and with consent of the parties the matter is heard finally.

(2.) In this writ petition, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks a writ of certiorari, for quashment of cabinet decision dated 28.4.2017 along with Government order dated 8.5.2017, by which respondent no.6 has been appointed as Principal of Government Medical College, Srinagar. The petitioner, inter alia, also seeks a direction to respondents to consider the case of petitioner for promotion against the post of Principal Government Medical College, Srinagar being the only eligible candidate and a direction to respondents to produce the records pertaining to the impugned selection.

(3.) The facts giving rise to filing of the writ petition, briefly stated, that it is the case of the petitioner that he became due for promotion to the post of Principal GMC Srinagar from 01.11.2013. However, on 24.2.2014, the respondents decided to grant extension in favour of Dr. Rafiq Pampori, who was due for superannuation on 28.2.2014 for a period of one year. Thereafter on 19.12.2015, the charge of the post of Principal GMC Srinagar was assigned to Dr. Kaiser Ahmad, who was junior to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in SWP no.2783/2015 and the order dated 19.12.2015 was stayed by a Bench of this Court. Being aggrieved aforesaid Dr. Kaiser Ahmad filed LPA, namely LPA no.07/2016, which was disposed of by Division Bench vide order dated 3.3.2016, with a direction to respondent no.1 to fill up the post on regular basis in accordance with rules within eight weeks. It is the case of the petitioner that even though the name of the petitioner alone was recommended for appointment to the post in question by Establishment-cum-Selection Committee and the same was submitted for approval, to the State Cabinet, in the form of Memorandum, yet the State Cabinet has taken a decision to appoint respondent no.6 on 24.8.2017 and thereafter the impugned order of appointment was passed. In the aforesaid factual background the petitioner has approached this Court.