R K KAW Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 32 2A of the Constitution of India as applied to the State of Jammu and Kashmir as well as under S. 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ against the opposite parties directing the Government to restore die petitioner to his due seniority and rank in the Electrical Department as Assistant Engineer and praying that his pay be ordered to be fixed according to the scale 300 -25 -500 to which he is entitled from 14 -4 -1955 and lastly that his earlier portion of service i.e. 14 years 8 months and 29 days be declared as regular temporary establishment to be continued towards his pension.

(2.) THE petitioner, Dr. Kaw who is at present Inspector of Boilers Jammu Province, stated in his petition that he was a citizen of India and had qualified himself in Electrical Engineering from a recognised institute City and Guilds Institute, London and became an Engineering Graduate of the institute in the year 1937. He also took the M. A. Degree of the Punjab University and in the later years won the Ph. D. degree of the Punjab University for the results of his researches in an unexplored field in 1950. He was promoted to the post of Inspector of Boilers Jammu in the year 1949 on a salary of Rs. 150 -15 -300. The petitioner proceeded on one months leave on 1 -8 -1951 and was appointed on a temporary post of Research Assistant in the Government of India for nearly four years. The petitioner reported himself to his duty in the State in the Electrical Department on 14 -4 -1955. The petitioner alleged that he was entitled to the post of Assistant Electrical Engineer which was held in absence by one Mr. B. D. Nanda, officer junior to the petitioner, but he was not given that job and was posted to his old post of Inspector of Boilers which according to him was clearly against rules as his higher qualifications merit and seniority were not taken into consideration.

(3.) BEFORE the petitioner was taken in permanent service he had put in about 15 years temporary service and the petitioner prayed that this period may be treated regular service and counted towards his pension as was done in several other cases which are referred to by the petitioner in his petition. 3a The petitioner made several representations to the higher authorities but no heed was paid to them and it is alleged that differential treatment has been meted out to him and his fundamental rights have been violated and hence the present petition.