State’s appeal on KAS officer’s induction into IAS dismissed - watsupptoday.com
State’s appeal on KAS officer’s induction into IAS dismissed
Posted 28 Oct 2017 03:41 PM

Agencies
A Division Bench of State High Court comprising Chief Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey on Friday dismissed the Letter Patents Appeal (LPA) filed by the State of Jammu and Kashmir through Commissioner/ Secretary to Government, General Administration Department, and the Establishment-cum-Selection Committee through its Chairman viz. Chief Secretary, J&K State against the judgment and order dated June 2, 2016 passed by the Writ Court in respondent No.1’s writ petition vide SWP No.1768/2015, in which the Writ Court had quashed Government order no.1036-GAD of 2015 dated July 30, 2015 with direction to the appellants herein to comply with the earlier judgment of the Court dated March 31, 2015 passed in the petitioner’s two earlier clubbed writ petitions including SWP No.946/2006 and SWP No.805/2008, and to give all consequential benefits to the petitioner with further direction to them to consider the claim of the petitioner for his induction into Indian Administrative Service (IAS) in accordance with the mandate contained in the earlier judgment and his name be recommended along with other selected candidates.
The Division Bench observed that apart from recording a clear and conclusive finding that on the basis of the admissions made by the respondents in their reply, the controversy narrowed down to justifiability of non-consideration of respondent No.1 for appointment to the Time Scale of Service under Technical Quota in terms of Rule 5(1)(b) on account of non-availability of APRs. “The Writ Court had also found it as a fact that the respondent No.1’s representation for his appointment to the service was examined by the Establishment-cum-Selection Committee under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary more than once and thereafter, the Committee in its meeting held on April 25, 2007 asked the respondents to find out the reasons for respondent No.1’s non-consideration by the Selection Committee on July 15, 1999. The Committee constituted is said to have attributed his non-consideration on July 15, 1999 to non-availability of his APRs and the above judgment rendered by the Writ Court was not challenged by the State-respondents and, thereby, they accepted the same.
Division Bench further observed that so far as the requirement of submitting willingness / option for induction is concerned, the respondent No.1 had represented for his consideration for induction to aforesaid services on June 24, 1997, much before the cut-off date. DB after considering various other significant factors relating to case observed that it was iniquitous on the part of the appellants to invoke a ground which neither existed nor was taken up at any stage by the respondents during the previous rounds of litigation and is against record. Such a conduct on the part of the respondents strikes at their behavioural deficiency in good faith and, therefore, cannot be sustained.
With these observations, Division Bench dismissed the appeal.

Leave a comment: (Your email will not be published)