news details |
|
|
| DB directs personal appearance of Commissioner Secretary Higher Education | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Nov 18: A division bench of High Court comprising Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Mohan Lal today while taking serious note over the functioning of government and for not implementing the judgment of Court for last 22 years, directed personal presence of Asgar Samoon, Commissioner/Secretary, Higher & Technical Education now Skill Development Department for the purposes of framing the charge, if necessary.
The DB observed that the petitioner is complaining of the disobedience of the judgment and order dated 12-5-1999 passed in LPA (SW) No. 22/1998, 'Anita Kumari and Anr v. State of J&K and Others,' whereby the state authorities were directed to consider the claim of the petitioner on the same lines as in the case of 9 other teachers for the purposes of regularization.
The SLP preferred against the judgment and order was dismissed on 30-7-2001 with the direction that in the next selection, candidature of the petitioner shall be considered irrespective of the age bar and that the existing vacancies shall be filled up by selection within six months. Since the SLP was dismissed without granting leave to appeal, the judgment and order appealed against remained intact and was not disturbed in any manner, rather an additional condition was imposed regarding the participation of the petitioner in the next selection.
The DB observed that subsequently, on proceedings for contempt initiated before the Supreme Court, it was made clear that the State authorities would consider the case of the petitioner in the same manner as they have considered the cases of the persons mentioned in the Government of Jammu and Kashmir Order dated 1-2-1995, for the purposes of regularization within six weeks.
The DB observed that the state authorities, despite the above clarification and reiteration by the Supreme Court of the direction of this Court, have not cared to comply with the same and rather started commenting upon the orders of the Supreme Court that they are not in harmony. About 22 years have passed but the state authorities have not followed the directions.
The DB directed that the Secretary, on appearance, would inform the manner he proposes to compensate the petitioner for the loss that she may have suffered due to non consideration of her case for regularization for last 22 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
