High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 02 J&K CK 0010

Abdul Khaliq Dar vs State of J&K and others.

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 1 February 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Kumar
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
1275 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

89 paragraphs · 1,344 words
1.

The petitioner seeks a writ of quo warranto against the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 working as Farm Managers in the respondent-department. As a,,,,,,

sequel to the aforesaid relief the petitioner has also prayed for quashment of all orders of appointments of respondent Nos. 4 to 6 issued on,,,,,,

12.07.1991, 17.07.1991 and 22.07.1991 respectively. The placement of respondent Nos. 4 to 6 on the higher posts ordered vide different",,,,,,

government orders issued from time to time is also subject matter of challenge in this petition.,,,,,,

2.

Briefly stated, the facts, as projected by the petitioner in this petition, are that the petitioner was appointed as Sericulture Assistant in the year",,,,,,

1985 vide order No.Ads/As/85/23 dated 01.07.1985 issued by the then Advisor, Sericulture Department. He was later on placed as Incharge",,,,,,

Deputy Director, Sericulture vide order No.06-Agri of 2008 dated 11.01.2008. It is, thus, claimed by the petitioner that being a Sericulture",,,,,,

Assistant borne on the Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture Subordinate Service is entitled to be promoted to the post of Deputy Director, Sericulture",,,,,,

borne on the Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture Gazetted Service. The grievance of the petitioner, however, is with respect to the appointment of",,,,,,

respondent Nos. 4 to 6 as Farm Managers in the Sericulture Development Department of the State as also against the contemplated move of the,,,,,,

official respondents to promote them to the post of Deputy Director, Sericulture. It is submitted by the petitioner that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 were",,,,,,

appointed as Farm Managers in the National Sericulture Project sanctioned by the Government of India in consultation with the State Government,,,,,,

and the aforesaid project was to be implemented over a period of five years commencing from April, 1989. That being so, it is submitted by the",,,,,,

petitioner, the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 were never appointed to the Jammu & Kashmir Agriculture Subordinate Service nor were they ever",,,,,,

absorbed in the Sericulture Development Department by the competent authority by any formal order. On this analogy, it is stated that respondent",,,,,,

Nos. 4 to 6 who were holding the post of Farm Managers in the National Sericulture Project never became the employees of the State,,,,,,

Government nor was the post of Farm Manager ever encadred in the Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture Subordinate Service constituted vide Jammu,,,,,,

& Kashmir Sericulture (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979. It is, thus, contended by the petitioner that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 cannot",,,,,,

be treated to be employees of Sericulture department and therefore are not eligible/entitled to be promoted to the post of Deputy Director,",,,,,,

Sericulture borne on the Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture Gazetted Service constituted vide SRO 108 of 1995 dated 20.04.1995.,,,,,,

3.

On being put on notice, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent Nos. 4 to 6 have filed their separate affidavits. In addition to the objections",,,,,,

filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3, aforesaid respondents have also filed a compliance report in terms of order dated 13.11.2017 by which this",,,,,,

Court had directed the official respondents to furnish information with reference to the closure of National Sericulture Project and the status of,,,,,,

employees/posts which were created under this project after its closure.,,,,,,

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.,,,,,,

5.

Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as Sericulture Assistant in the year 1985 and has, therefore, acquired eligibility to be promoted as",,,,,,

Deputy Director and equivalent in terms of Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1995, wherein 30% posts of",,,,,,

Deputy Director/Manager Seed etc. are required to be filled up from amongst the Sericulture Assistants/Demonstrators provided they are science,,,,,,

graduate with five years experience or other graduates with seven years experience in their class.,,,,,,

6.

Similarly, the post of Farm Manager also falls in the feeding category for promotion to the post of Deputy Director, Sericulture. In view of the",,,,,,

rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the only question that falls for determination in this petition is as under:-",,,,,,

Whether respondent Nos. 4 to 6 who were initially appointed as Farm Managers in the National Sericulture Project have become the permanent",,,,,,

employees of the Sericulture Department and are, therefore, eligible to be promoted to the post of Deputy Director in terms of the Jammu &",,,,,,

Kashmir Sericulture (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1995.""",,,,,,

7.

If answer to the aforesaid question is in the affirmative then the petitioner has no case as in that eventuality both, the petitioner who is Sericulture",,,,,,

Assistant and respondent Nos. 4 to 6 who are Farm Managers, would be eligible and entitled to be promoted to the post of Deputy Director",,,,,,

under the Rules of 1995.,,,,,,

8.

It is the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though respondent Nos. 4 and 6 were appointed as Farm Managers by the,,,,,,

Department of Sericulture pursuant to the recommendation of the Jammu & Kashmir State Subordinate Service Recruitment Board, yet their",,,,,,

appointment was against the posts available in the centrally sponsored project, i.e., National Sericulture Project and their services were co-",,,,,,

terminus with the life of the project. Learned counsel for the petitioner further elaborates that though after the closure of the project the service of,,,,,,

respondent Nos. 4 to 6 were utilized in the Sericulture Department but there was no formal order issued by the competent authority with regard to,,,,,,

their regular absorption. He, therefore, submits that continuation of respondent Nos. 4 to 6 as Farm Managers in the Sericulture Department was",,,,,,

without any orders from the competent authority and therefore, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 cannot be treated to be part of or borne on the Jammu &",,,,,,

Kashmir Sericulture (Subordinate) Service. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the Jammu & Kashmir Sericulture (Subordinate),,,,,,

Services Recruitment Rules, 1979 to demonstrate that the post of Farm Manager does not exist in the Rules.",,,,,,

9.

Per contra, the submission of learned counsel appearing for the respondents is that it is true that the post of Farm Manager was initially created",,,,,,

for running the National Sericulture Project which was finalized for the country as a whole by the Government of India in consultation with the,,,,,,

concerned State authorities/World Bank. The project was to be implemented over a period of five years commencing from April, 1989. So far as",,,,,,

Farm Manager is concerned, 10 posts were immediately created and five were to be created in future as is evident from Government Order",,,,,,

No.328/Ind of 1989 dated 26.10.1989. It is stated that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 were appointed to the project but their appointment was pursuant,,,,,,

to the recommendation made by the Jammu & Kashmir State Subordinate Recruitment Board which made such recommendations after holding,,,,,,

proper selection process. Strong reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the respondents on Government Order No.256-Agri of 2006,,,,,,

dated 28.09.2006 wherein amongst others 208 posts sanctioned for National Sericulture Project were retained whereas 99 posts were abolished.,,,,,,

Amongst the posts retained, 10 posts of Farm Manager figure at serial No.14 of the aforesaid order. It is contended by the learned counsel for the",,,,,,

official respondents that the Government Order dated 28.09.2006 was issued for retention of staff partially in the Sericulture Development,,,,,,

Department. He, therefore, submits that in terms of order dated 28.09.2006, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 who had been working as Farm Managers in",,,,,,

S.No.,"Cate-

gory",Designation,Grade,"Minimum

qualification for

direct

recruitment",Method of Recruitment,

VII,A,"Dy. Director/ Manager

Seed/ Research Officer/

Principal S.T.I./ Project

Officer (Bani).","2000-

3400","1. B.Tech. Silk

Tech. or

2.

B.Sc. with

Post Graduate

Diploma from

C.S.B, or

3.

M.Sc.

Botany/ Zoology","50% by direct recruitment &; 50% by promotion/ Selection from the J&K

Sericulture (Subordinate) Service in the manner indicated against each:-",

,,,,,"a)Lecturers/ Farm

Managers/ Tassar/Project

Officers/Mark-et

Supervisors(2000-3200)","60% provided they are graduated with JSC

having atleast 5 years experience in that class.

,,,,,b) Instructors (1760-3200),"10% provided the incumbent is B.Sc. with

PGD in Sericulture having 5 years experience

in particular class.

,,,,,"c) Sericulture

Asstt;/Demonstrators.

(1400-2600)","30% provided the incumbents are Science

Graduate with 5 years experience or other

graduates with 7 years experience in the

particular class.