news details |
|
|
| HC quashes order, directs Govt to accord benefit of seniority to petitioner | | Cancellation of appointment of Patwari | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Feb 11: A Single Bench of High Court of Jammu and Kashmir quashed the impugned order dated 24.03.2011 passed by revenue officials and directed the revenue department to accord the benefit of seniority notionally to the petitioner from the date the same has been extended to the similarly situated persons.
According to the petition, the petitioner belongs to RBA 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 SWP No.1338/1999, which was disposed of by a Bench and 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.
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. 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.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of seniority on the post in question. On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that benefit of seniority cannot be granted him from the year 1999, in the light of the Rule 24 of the Jammu and Kashmir Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, 1956.
Justice Alok Aradhe held that the aforesaid order has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court. Thus, the finding was recorded by the learned Single Judge that the petitioner is entitled to be sent for training and thereafter he be put at par with other candidates, who were sent for training. The aforesaid finding is binding on the respondents.
Justice Alok Aradhe quashed the impugned order dated 24.03.2011 passed by respondent No.2 and directed to accord the benefit of seniority notionally to the petitioner from the date the same has been extended to the similarly situated persons within a period of two months from the date of order passed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
