news details |
|
|
| Basharat matured for retirement on 30-09-2009 | | Early Times obtains ultimate proof of IAS officer's DOB cheating: J&K High Court dismissed Basharat Ahmed Dhar's suit in 2002, decreed that change in DOB can't be granted 24 years after passing Matriculation Examination | | Ahmed Ali Fayyaz
SRINAGAR, Oct 18: In a rare development, unprecedented in the history of Jammu & Kashmir's bureaucracy, an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer is working as Commissioner-Secretary of Power Development Department (PDD) in Omar Abdullah's coalition government over two years after he reached superannuation on September 30th, 2009. Incontrovertible judicial evidence, that is n0w very much in possession of Early Times, makes it conclusively clear that Basharat Ahmed Dhar has concealed facts and offered fiction in claiming that he had "never ever in my life" changed or manipulated his date of birth (DOB) from joining his school to the end of his service career for overstaying in the government service.
After an extensive professional exercise, Early Times today discovered that after nearly 14 years of continuous service, Basharat Ahmed Dhar filed a suit in the court of City Munsiff Srinagar on 07-04-1988 for declaration and injunction with the prayer that the Chairman, Jammu & Kashmir Board of Secondary Education (BOSE) be directed to record his DOB as 25th Chet, 2007, (07-04-1951 A.D) in the Board records, instead of 07-09-1949 as reflected in his Matriculation Certificate. He prayed for issuance of a fresh Matriculation certificate accordingly.
After months of hearing, City Munsiff decreed in an ex parte judgment on 09-05-1989 that the change in DOB be granted in favour of the petitioner and a fresh Matriculation Certificate be issued to him. Chairman BOSE went in appeal to the Court of District & Sessions Judge Srinagar. Fourth Additional District & Sessions Judge Srinagar dismissed the appeal on 28-08-1993 on the ground of delay in filing the appeal and rejection of the application for condonation of delay. Subsequently, Chairman BOSE filed Civil Revision No: 195 in J&K High Court, seeking annulment of orders of both the subordinate courts.
Dhar has been inducted into IAS, with his year of allotment as 1989, on the basis of his Matriculation Certificate which mentions
His DOB as 25-12-1951. According to this document, which has been submitted to all offices from General Administration Department (GAD) of J&K Government to the office of Accountant General and union Public Service Commission (UPSC), and which forms the basis of Dhar's Service Book, he passed Matriculation Examination under Roll No: 4806 in the year 1966. However, in the suit filed in Srinagar subordinate court, Dhar has recorded on oath that he passed Matriculation Examination under Roll No: 4013 in annual session of the year 1964. His DOB is recorded as 07-09-1949.
All these facts were concealed by Dhar when he claimed to this newspaper yesterday while claiming that he had never ever in his life changed or manipulated his DOB.
Finally, in the elaborate judgment delivered by Justice Muzaffar Jan of J&K High Court on 02-03-2002, Dhar's petition was fully dismissed and orders of both, City Munsiff Srinagar and Fourth Additional District & Sessions Judge Srinagar, were set aside. It is now clearly a case of investigation for Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) as to how Dhar obtained a fresh Matriculation Certificate from BOSE which mentions his DOB as 25-12-1951 instead of 07-09-1949 and records that he passed Matriculation Examination under Roll No: 4806 in the year 1966 instead of Roll No: 4013 in the year 1964.
This revelation, which comes from the state's highest judicial forum, has made all of Dhar's testimonials, service records and even the process of his induction into IAS suspect.
Officials at J&K State Board of School Education as well as Advocate Hakeem Ishtiaq Hussain, who represented the Board in J&K High Court, told Early Times that after losing his case at High Court, Dhar did not approach any higher judicial forum with appeal. Board officials said that, to the best of their knowledge, no fresh Matriculation was issued to Dhar. "There was no question of issuing a fresh certificate or effecting change in Dhar's DOB as the matter was settled by High Court in favour of the Board", said an official.
Even as the final judgment of Justice Jan, dated 02-03-2002, was published in Srinagar Law Journal in the year 2002 and top rungs of J&K bureaucracy are believed to have had knowledge of this important development, none of the successive Chief Secretaries or Secretaries of GAD bothered to make necessary corrections in Dhar's service records. Nobody in successive governments made any attempt to inform Department of Training & Personnel, that regulates Indian Administrative Service and functions directly under Prime Minister of India, that the IAS officer of J&K cadre was due to reach superannuation on 30-09-2011.
Interestingly, after his induction into IAS on the basis of forged or wrongfully issued documents, Dhar functioned not only as Secretary and Commissioner-Secretary of key departments like PDD but also headed the all important GAD. He also remained posted as Divisional Commissioner of Kashmir. Omar Abdullah's government recently awarded him the prestigious Chief Minister's Gold Medal for impressive and efficient performance in service.
As clearly recorded in the judgment, Justice Jan decreed that change in DOB in favour of the official could not be granted 24 years after his passing the Matriculation Examination in 1964. He has observed that Dhar should have sought correction in his DOB within a year of the declaration of result under Rule 17 of the Rules of the Board. In case of failure at the Board, petitioner could have sought judicial intervention within three years i.e. upto 1967.
"Article 67 of the Schedule to Limitation Act relating to the grant of relief on the ground of mistake prescribed three years' period of limitation and the time from which the period begins to run is relatable to the discovery of the mistake by the plaintiff. Apart from Article 67, Article 181 of the Schedule to Limitation Act also prescribes three years as period of limitation for such like suits. That being so, respondent No: 1 could have filed the suit in the year 1967. He, instead, filed the suit in the year 1988 i.e. 24 years after he gained the knowledge", Justice Jan has observed in the order.
And the operative portion of the High Court order reads: "Consequently, the judgment and order dated 09-05-1989, passed by the learned City Munsiff Srinagar, and order dated 28-08-1993, passed by learned IV Additional District Judge Srinagar, are set aside. Since the suit of the respondent plaintiff (Basharat Ahmed Dhar) has been held to be hopelessly barred by limitation, the same is dismissed". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
