DINESH KUMAR NAYYAR Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to treat the petitioner having been appointed retrospectively w.e.f. April 92, and to accord other consequential benefits including the maintenance of his seniority position.

(2.) THE brief facts for the disposal of the case are that petitioner along with others had applied for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grd.II in pursuance to a notification issued by the J&K Service Selection Recruitment Board in the year 1988. The selection made by the respondents in this regard became the subject matter of challenge in SWP No. 369/88 titled Vijay Kumar Sharma and ors v. State and ors. This court vide judgment dt. 20th of Sept90, allowed the writ petition and quashed the selection of private respondents therein with a direction to respondent State to fill up the posts on the basis of merit and in accordance with the rules governing the field. Against the aforesaid judgment, the State of Jammu and Kashmir, preferred an appeal bearing LPA No. 153/90. A Division Bench of this court while deciding the appeal directed that the cases of the writ petitioners(respondents in the appeal) in the aforesaid writ petition would be considered and they would be entitled for adjustment only against the vacancies which are available with the Government as on the date of passing of order by this court i.e.20th Sept90. Thereafter, the State Government in compliance to the judgment passed by this Court in the aforementioned LPA, constituted a Committee and initiated the process of selection in which the petitioner also participated. In pursuance to the selection process, a select list of Junior Engineer (Civil) Gr.II was issued by respondents in which the name of the petitioner did not figure which led him to file another writ petition bearing SWP No. 463/92. The said writ petition was allowed by this court vide judgment dated 16th of March95. The respondent -State was directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer Grade -II( Civil) irrespective of his status as a stipendiary engineer but this was subject to his suitability and availability of posts. The respondents after considering the case of the petitioner issued appointment order in his favour dt. 27th of April 2000.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that he was one of the writ petitioner in SWP No. 369/88, referred to above, and therefore, when the respondents allowed the benefit of appointment in favour of similarly situated persons vide Government Order No.175 -PW of 1992 dt. 30th of April92, which was passed in compliance to the judgments passed by this court in the aforesaid writ petition and LPA No.153/90, then the petitioner cannot be singled out and denied the said benefit. It is submitted that the respondents later on allowed the benefit in favour of some of the candidates who had also been left out of zone of consideration while passing order dt. 30th of April92. Reliance in this regard is placed on Government Order No.41 -PW of 1993 dt. 25th of Jan93 (Annexure E.1). It is thus submitted that when the writ petitioners in writ petition bearing SWP No.369/88 have been given the benefit of appointment w.e.f. 30th of April92, then the petitioner herein who was also one of the petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition cannot be denied this benefit as he is also similarly situated. It is stated that respondent authorities cannot adopt a different yard -stick so far as the petitioner is concerned. Through the medium of present writ petition, a direction is thus sought to respondents for according the benefit of appointment and other consequential benefits in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. the same date i.e. 30th of April92 as has been given to the rest of writ petitioners in aforesaid writ petition.