Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Waseem Mohi-Ud-Din Lone vs Government Of J&K And Others on 1 November, 2019
Author: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Bench: Ali Mohammad Magrey
S. No. 67
Supplementary
list
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) no. 3192/2019
CM no. 6382/2019
Waseem Mohi-ud-din Lone
.... Petitioner(s)
Through:- Mr Syed Musaib, Advocate
v/s
Government of J&K and others.
.... Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY, JUDGE
ORDER
Petitioner has not disputed the fallout of the judgment rendered by this Court in case titled Sheeraz Ahmad Rather v. State and others, in terms whereof this Court, while allowing the writ petition of the petitioner therein had directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for his appointment to the post of Constable under the RBA category against the available post by excluding the candidate lower in age holding the post under the said category as compared to that of the petitioner therein.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the judgment supra, the Order No. 4208 of 2019 dated 25.10.2019, for short impugned order, has been issued by the respondents, whereby the petitioner's appointment as Constable in J&K Executive Police under RBA Category has been cancelled abinitio and Shri Sheeraz Ahmad Rather has been approved for his selection as Constable in J&K Executive Police under RBA category in district Kulgam, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, was not the mandate of the judgment of this Court supra, for, the judgment in compliance whereof the impugned order is issued, has not quashed the appointment of the petitioner but has directed that Sh Sheeraz Ahmad, petitioner in SWP no. 463/2014, be considered against the post in question by excluding the candidate lower in age holding such post. Learned counsel, while strengthening his claim, submits that the petitioner's ouster is wrongly done by the respondents as he is not the candidate who is lower in age but it is Sh Inayat Hussain Mir who is lower in age. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits further that the respondent no. 2, while issuing the impugned order, has overstepped his authority to cancel the appointment of the petitioner purportedly in compliance to the judgment of this Court.
Heard. Admit. Notice, on asking is waived by Mr B. A. Dar, learned Sr. AAG.
In order to ascertain as to how the respondent No. 2, Director General of Police, J&K, Srinagar, has cancelled the appointment of the petitioner ab- initio, it is necessary to seek the response from the respondents, therefore, Mr B. A. Dar, learned Sr. AAG, is asked to submit the response within two weeks. In the meanwhile, the respondents, while giving effect to the appointment of Sh. Sheeraz Ahmad, petitioner in SWP no. 463/2014, shall allow the petitioner to continue till next date before the Bench, notwithstanding the impugned order dated 25.10.2019, as has been done in a somewhat similar case in terms of Order No. 71 of 2014 dated 09.01.2014, forming Annexure III with the writ petition.
List on 27th December, 2019.
In view of urgency expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let a copy of the order be furnished to him under the seal and signatures of Bench Secretary.
(ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY) JUDGE Srinagar 01.11.2019 Amjad Lone PS AMJAD AHMAD LONE 2019.11.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document