Central Administrative Tribunal - Jammu
Mohd Rafiq Bhat vs Forest Department on 16 March, 2026
:: 1 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
-CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)
Hearing through video conferencing
Original Application Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
Reserved on:- 04.08.2025
Pronounced on: - 16.03.2026
HON'BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)
1. OA/1317/2023
MOHD. RAFIQ BHAT, Age 53 years
S/o Ghulam Qadir Bhat
R/o Quilla Mohalla Bhaderwah
PIN-182222, U.T. of J&K
...Applicant
(By Advocate: - Mr. N.A Chowdhary)
VERSUS
1. U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir
Through Commissioner Secretary, Forest Department, J&K
Government, Jammu
PIN-180001
2. Principle Chief Conservator of Forest, Jammu, PIN-180001
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 2 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
3. Chief Conservator of Forest, Jammu, PIN-180001
4. Conservator of Forest, Chenab Circle, Doda.
PIN-182202
5. Divisional Forest Officer,
Bhaderwah Division, Bhaderwah, PIN-182222
6. Range Officer
Soil Conservator Range
Bhaderwah PIN-182222
...Respondents.
(By Advocate: - Mr. Sudesh Magotra, AAG, Mr. Sumant Sudan)
2. OA/428/2024
ABDUL HAFIZ GANAI, Age 59+years
S/o Late Abdul Gufar Ganai R/o Haveli Mohalla Bhaderwah, A/p Soil
Conservative, Range Bhaderwah PIN-182222
...Applicant
(By Advocate: - Mr. N.A Chowdhary)
VERSUS
1. U.T. of Jammu and Kashmir Through Commissioner Secretary,
Forest Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu, PIN-180001
2. Commissioner Secretary General Administrative Department, Civil
Secretariat, Jammu-180001
3. Chief Conservator of Forest, J&K Jammu-180001
4. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Bhaderwah-182222
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 3 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
5. Range Officer, Soil Range, Forest Division, Bhaderwah-182222
6. Principal Accountant General, Canal Road, Jammu 180001.
...Respondents.
(By Advocate: Mr. Sudesh Magotra, AAG, Mr. Sumant Sudan.)
3. CP 368/2024
ABDUL HAFIZ GANAI, Age 61 years
S/o Late Abdul Gufar Ganai R/o Haveli Mohalla Bhaderwah, A/p Soil
Conservative, Range Bhaderwah PIN-182222
...Applicant
(By Advocate: - Mr. N.A Chowdhary)
VERSUS
1. SH. SHAILANDER KUMAR (IAS)
Through its Commissioner Secretary to Govt.
Forest Department, Environment Ecology, Civil Secretariat,
Jammu/Srinagar-180001
2.SH. SANJEEV VERMA (IAS)
Commissioner Secretary,
General Administration Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu, PIN-180001
3.SH. M.R. KUMAR (IFS)
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 4 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
Chief Conservator of Forest, J&K, Jammu-180001.
SH. MOHD. AYUB KHAN (ACF)
Divisional Forest Officer,, Forest Division, Bhaderwah- 182222.
5.SH. AZAD HUSSAIN
Range Officer, Soil Range Forest Division, Bhaderwah-182222
6.JAI PARKASH NARAIN PRINCIPLE
Accountant Genera (A&E)
Canal Road, Jammu-180001
...RESPONDENTS
(By Advocate: Mr. Sudesh Magotra, AAG, Mr. Sumant Sudan.)
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 5 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -
1. OA/1317/2023
a) "That the applicant has been given notional benefit in service in terms of Hon'ble Court judgments and in terms of government order as such the action of respondents in absolutely illegal and arbitrary and violates the rights guaranteed to the applicant by Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.
b) That the orders of recovery has been passed by respondent no.
2 & 3 has been passed on flimsy grounds and against the judgments of Hon'ble High Court and same is not sustainable in the eyes of law as such order passed by respondent no.2 & 3 dated 01.09.2023 and 05.09.2023 for recovery of salary is required to be quashed and respondents may be directed to HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 6 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 release the salary of applicant along with all notion benefit as has been granted and released in favour of applicant for last four years.
c) That the applicant is having completed his service for regularisation in the year 2001 in terms of judgment of Hon'ble High Court Division Bench considering the judgment passed by Apex Court as such the notional benefit cannot be declined to applicant as has been rightly given to petitioner by Hon'ble High Court and approved by empowerment committee of state govt.
2. OA/428/2024
a) Allow the instant Original Application.
b) Quash the Forest Department Order bearing No.502- JKF(FST) of 2022 dated 28.12.2022 passed by respondent no.1.
c) Direct the respondents to allow the pensionary benefits to petitioner as has been accorded to said Mohd. Rafiq Bhat a semi situated person in the said office.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 7 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
d) Direct the respondents to regularize the services of applicant
with effect from 2001 as held by Hon'ble Division Bench in LPA SW No.194/2009.
e) Direct the respondents to grant notional benefit of service to petitioner as has been granted to Mohd. Rafiq Bhat working in the same office in terms of Hon'ble High Court Judgment as allowed to said Mohd. Rafiq Bhat.
f) Any other order or directions which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed.
3. CP 368/2024 It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that for the reasons stated above and those to be urged at the time of hearing of contempt, the contempt proceedings may kindly be initiated against the respondents for not having implemented the Order dated 20.05.2024 passed in O.A. No.428/2024 titled Abdul Hafiz Ganai V/s U.T of J&K & Ors through Commissioner Secretary Forest Department and Others in its latter and spirit and dealt HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 8 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 in accordance with law. It is further prayed that the respondents may kindly be directed to implement the Hon'ble Tribunal Order in latters and spirit without any further delay. Such other additional or alternate order which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deems proper in the facts and circumstances of case may also be passed in favour of petitioner and against the respondents in the interest of justice.
2. The facts of the case as averred by the applicants in their pleadings, are as follows: -
a) The applicant therein, namely Mohd. Rafiq Bhat, was initially engaged as a Daily Wager in the Forest Department and continued to work for a considerable period. After rendering long service, his claim for regularization came to be considered in light of judicial directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court in SWP No. 2069/2006, which was decided in favour of the applicant. The said judgment was later upheld in appellate proceedings.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 9 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
b) Pursuant thereto, the competent authority regularized the services of the applicant as Helper in relaxation of rules under SRO-64 of 1994 vide Government Order No. 246- FST of 2019 dated 21.08.2019. However, while implementing the said order, the departmental authorities granted notional retrospective effect from an earlier date, allegedly resulting in release of arrears and monetary benefits which, according to the department, were not admissible under rules.
c) Subsequently, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, J&K, upon scrutiny of the matter, issued communication dated 01.09.2023, observing that the grant of retrospective notional benefits was not in accordance with the Government Order and applicable rules. Directions were issued to initiate recovery proceedings of the excess amount of Rs. 10,31,889/-, which had been disbursed to the applicant.
d) In compliance with the said directions, the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhaderwah, issued an order dated 09.09.2023, initiating recovery proceedings against the applicant and HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 10 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 directing that the excess amount be recovered in instalments from his salary.
e) Aggrieved by the said recovery order and contending that the benefits had been granted after due consideration and in compliance with judicial directions, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 1317/2023, challenging the recovery proceedings as being arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice.
f) Upon consideration of the matter, this Tribunal passed an interim order dated 05.10.2023, whereby the operation of the recovery order was stayed, thereby protecting the applicant from coercive recovery pending adjudication of the Original Application.
a) The applicant/petitioner, namely Abdul Hafiz Ganai, was initially engaged as a Daily Wager in the Forest Department on 30.01.1994 by the competent authority. After rendering continuous service, his services came to be disengaged vide Government Order dated 02.02.2001, which compelled him to seek judicial redress.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 11 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
b) Aggrieved of the disengagement and denial of regularisation, the petitioner approached the Hon'ble High Court by filing SWP No. 2569/2001, which was allowed by the Hon'ble Single Bench vide judgment dated 12.05.2009, directing the respondents to consider his case for regularisation under the applicable rules governing Daily Wagers. The respondents challenged the said judgment by filing LPA (SW) No. 194/2009, which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench vide judgment dated 20.12.2012, wherein it was categorically held that the petitioner had completed seven years of continuous service in the year 2001 and was therefore entitled to regularisation from the said date.
c) In purported compliance of the aforesaid judicial directions, the Government issued Government Order dated 05.04.2016, whereby the petitioner was taken back into service. However, according to the petitioner, the consequential benefits of counting of past service, grant of notional benefits from the year 2001 and extension of pensionary benefits were not granted to him.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 12 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
d) It is the specific case of the petitioner that another similarly situated employee working in the same office was granted regularisation along with notional service benefits from the year 2001 pursuant to the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court, which were also upheld in appeal. On account of denial of parity, the petitioner issued a legal notice and thereafter approached this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 314/2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 25.07.2022 directing the respondents to consider his claim in the light of the judgments passed in favour of similarly situated employees and his service record.
e) Instead of granting the due benefits, the respondents passed Government Order dated 28.12.2022, whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of notional service benefits was rejected. The petitioner challenged the said action by filing O.A. No. 428/2024 before this Tribunal, contending that the rejection order was contrary to the binding judgments of the Hon'ble High Court, violative of the principle of parity and natural justice, and had resulted in denial of pensionary benefits.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 13 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
f) During the pendency of the said Original Application, the petitioner retired from service in May, 2024 without grant of pensionary benefits. Taking note of the urgency of the matter, this Tribunal passed an order dated 20.05.2024 directing the respondents to release provisional pension and consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law.
g) Despite the order having been passed in the presence of counsel for the respondents and having been duly conveyed to the authorities, no effective steps were taken for implementation. The matter was adjourned on several occasions on requests made by the respondents for filing objections. Even the Accountant General, Jammu, who had been impleaded as a party, failed to file response.
h) In view of continued non-compliance of the Tribunal's order dated 20.05.2024 and non-grant of pensionary benefits, the petitioner was constrained to initiate Contempt Petition No. 368/2024, alleging wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this Tribunal. The petitioner has asserted that denial of counting of his past service from the year 2001, despite clear HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 14 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 judicial pronouncements and extension of similar benefits to similarly situated employees, has caused grave prejudice and financial hardship.
i) Thus, both the matters arise out of the same chain of events relating to disengagement of the petitioner, judicial directions for regularisation, denial of consequential service and pensionary benefits, challenge to rejection order, and subsequent non-compliance of the Tribunal's interim directions, thereby necessitating adjudication through a common judgment.
3. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
a) The answering respondents have filed objections contesting the claim of the applicant and have raised preliminary objections regarding maintainability of the Original Application. It is stated that no fundamental, legal or statutory right of the applicant has been violated and the application is liable to be dismissed. It is further pleaded that the applicant has not HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 15 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 approached the Tribunal with clean hands and has suppressed material facts. According to the respondents, the matter involves disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated in the present proceedings.
b) On merits, it is submitted that the applicant's claim for retrospective regularization and notional benefits has already been considered and rejected vide Government Order No. 205-JK(FST) of 2022 dated 28.12.2022. It is contended that under the provisions of SRO-64 of 1994, completion of seven years of service as Daily Wager does not automatically confer a right to retrospective regularization. Regularization under the said scheme is prospective in nature and subject to fulfilment of prescribed conditions. It is stated that the applicant has already been regularized as Helper in relaxation of rules vide Government Order No. 121-FST of 2016 dated 05.04.2016 and therefore his claim for further retrospective benefits is not permissible under law.
c) The respondents have also distinguished the case of the applicant from that of Mohd. Rafiq Bhat, stating that the HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 16 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 notional retrospective benefit allegedly granted to the said employee was not in accordance with rules and departmental authorities have already initiated proceedings for recovery of excess payment amounting to Rs. 10,31,889/-. It is submitted that the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, J&K, vide communication dated 01.09.2023, directed initiation of recovery proceedings and accordingly the Chief Conservator of Forests, Jammu issued directions to the concerned DFO for recovery of excess amount. The said recovery proceedings were subsequently stayed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1317/2023 titled Mohd. Rafiq Bhat vs UT of J&K & Ors. Thus, according to the respondents, the applicant cannot claim parity on the basis of an irregular benefit granted to another employee.
d) It is further pleaded that after regularization in the year 2016, the applicant's service came to be governed by the New Pension Scheme in terms of SRO-400 of 2009 and he continued to draw salary under the said scheme till his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation in May, 2024. The respondents submit that the competent authority has issued HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 17 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 various communications to the applicant requiring submission of requisite documents for processing of his retiral benefits. It is stated that notices dated 13.06.2024, 16.08.2024 and 07.11.2024 were issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhaderwah, to facilitate settlement of pensionary benefits and forwarding of the case to the office of the Accountant General, Jammu.
e) With regard to the interim order dated 20.05.2024 passed by this Tribunal directing release of provisional pension, the respondents submit that necessary steps are being taken in accordance with rules and procedural formalities, and there has been no wilful or deliberate disobedience of the order of the Tribunal. The delay, if any, is stated to be on account of administrative processing and requirement of completion of formal documentation. The respondents therefore pray that the Original Application as well as the Contempt Petition are liable to be dismissed as being devoid of merit.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings made by them.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 18 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
5. The above Original Applications involve substantially similar questions of fact and law relating to regularization of Daily Wagers under SRO-64 of 1994, grant of notional retrospective benefits, pensionary entitlements and legality of recovery of alleged excess payment, and therefore are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment. Consequentially, the Contempt Petition arising out of interim directions in O.A. No. 428/2024 is also being decided.
6. The applicants in both the Original Applications were initially engaged as Daily Wagers in the Forest Department in the 1990s and continued to render long years of service. After disengagement/irregular service conditions, they approached the Hon'ble High Court and subsequently this Tribunal seeking regularization and consequential benefits.
7. In the case of Abdul Hafiz Ganai (O.A. No. 428/2024), the applicant was engaged on 30.01.1994. His earlier writ petition was allowed and the order attained finality in appellate proceedings. Eventually, he was regularized as Helper in relaxation of rules vide Government Order dated 05.04.2016. The grievance of the applicant is that despite completion of seven years' continuous service by the year 2001, he HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 19 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 was denied retrospective notional benefits, whereas similarly situated persons were granted such benefit. The applicant retired in May, 2024 and alleged non-release of pensionary benefits, compelling him to file the present O.A. During pendency, this Tribunal directed release of provisional pension vide order dated 20.05.2024.
8. In the case of Mohd. Rafiq Bhat (O.A. No. 1317/2023), the applicant was also regularized as Helper pursuant to judicial directions. However, after grant of notional retrospective benefits and release of monetary arrears, the department initiated recovery proceedings alleging excess payment. The applicant challenged the recovery order dated 09.09.2023 before this Tribunal, which granted interim protection.
9. The respondents have contested both O.As primarily on the ground that regularization under SRO-64 is prospective in nature, that retrospective benefits cannot be claimed as a matter of right, and that recovery was initiated to rectify irregular grant of monetary benefits.
10. It is settled law that while regularization schemes may ordinarily operate prospectively, the Courts and Tribunals are empowered to HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 20 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024 grant notional benefits to remove discrimination and to ensure parity, particularly where an employee has been compelled to litigate for long years due to administrative inaction.
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka vs. M.L. Kesari (2010) 9 SCC 247 held that long continued service of Daily Wagers cannot be ignored and authorities are required to consider regularization fairly and reasonably. Similarly, in Direct Recruit Class-II Engineering Officers' Association vs. State of Maharashtra (1990) 2 SCC 715, it was held that service rendered in an officiating capacity pursuant to valid process cannot be wiped out for purposes of seniority and other benefits.
12. In the present cases, both applicants had rendered long continuous service and had obtained favourable judicial directions much earlier. Delay in granting consequential benefits is attributable to the department. Therefore, denial of notional retrospective effect has resulted in hostile discrimination, offending Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 21 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
13. The applicant Abdul Hafiz Ganai has already retired. Pension is not a bounty but a valuable property right, as held by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in D.S. Nakara vs. Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 305. Non-release of pensionary benefits despite judicial directions amounts to violation of constitutional and statutory obligations.
14. Further, in State of Jharkhand vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava (2013) 12 SCC 210, it was held that retiral benefits cannot be withheld without authority of law. In the present case, the applicant's entitlement to pensionary benefits has been unnecessarily delayed on account of denial of notional service benefits.
15. In O.A. No. 1317/2023, recovery has been ordered from the applicant on the premise that retrospective benefit was wrongly granted. The law on this issue is now well settled. In State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) (2015) 4 SCC 334, the Hon'ble Supreme Court categorically held that recovery from Class-III and Class-IV employees or retired employees, particularly where there is no misrepresentation or fraud, is impermissible.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 22 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
16. Similarly, in Thomas Daniel vs. State of Kerala (2022) 5 SCC 545, recovery after long lapse of time was disapproved. In the present case, the benefit had been granted by the competent authority and the applicant cannot be penalized for departmental lapse. Initiation of recovery proceedings is therefore arbitrary and unsustainable.
17. The principle that similarly situated persons cannot be treated differently is a cornerstone of service jurisprudence. Once the department itself has granted notional benefits in comparable cases, denial thereof to the present applicants is unjustified. The respondents cannot take inconsistent stands -- either the benefit must be uniformly extended or appropriate corrective action must be taken prospectively.
18. In view of the above findings and the directions now being issued in the Original Applications, the interim directions dated 20.05.2024 stand merged in the final judgment. Since substantive relief is being granted and compliance mechanism is being provided, continuation of contempt proceedings is not necessary.
19. Accordingly, both the Original Applications are allowed with the following directions:
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 23 :: O.A. Nos. 1317/2023 & 428/2024 & CP No.368/2024
a) The respondents shall grant notional retrospective regularization/service benefits to the applicants from the date they completed seven years of continuous service as Daily Wagers, for the limited purpose of fixation of pay, pension and other retiral benefits.
b) The respondents shall re-fix the pensionary benefits of applicant Abdul Hafiz Ganai after counting the notional service and release all consequential arrears within three months.
c) The recovery proceedings initiated against applicant Mohd.
Rafiq Bhat pursuant to order dated 09.09.2023 are hereby quashed. Any amount already recovered shall be refunded within three months.
d) No order as to costs.
20. In the facts and circumstances, the Contempt Petition No. 368/2024 is closed. Notice discharged.
(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
/harshit /
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV