MOHD. LATIEF Vs. STATE & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks a writ of certiorari for quashment of order dated 24.03.2011 issued by respondent-2. The petitioner also seeks writ of mandamus directing the respondent-2 to accord seniority benefits to the petitioner from the date other selectees of the same selection process for the post of Patwari in District Rajouri in the year 1999 were given the benefits.

(2.) Facts giving rise to the filing of the present writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner belongs to Residents of Backward Area Category. The petitioner participated in the process of selection/recruitment in the year 1999 for the posts of Patwaries in District Rajouri, under the category of Residents of Backward Area. However, when the select list was issued on 18.06.1999, the name of the petitioner was not mentioned in the aforesaid list. Thereupon, the petitioner along with another person approached this Court by filing a writ petition, namely, SWP No.1338/1999, which was disposed of by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.10.2000 with the direction that since the petitioner No.2 in the aforesaid writ petition, namely, the present petitioner, has obtained more than 41 marks, therefore, a direction was given to the respondents that petitioner No.2 be sent for training and thereafter he be put at par with other candidates, who were sent for training. The respondents were further directed to take requisite steps in this regard within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order dated 18.10.2000.

(3.) Admittedly, the aforesaid order was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondents by submitting a representation for grant of seniority. However, the claim of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 24.03.2011 on the ground that the seniority has reference to actual date of appointment in a particular class, category and grade to which a candidate is appointed. It was further held that since the petitioner was appointed as Patwari on 24.06.2002, as such, the benefit of seniority cannot be given to him from the year 1999. Accordingly, the claim of the petitioner was rejected. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioner has approached this Court.