Arif Ramzan Parray vs Union Territory Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.

JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]

The short controversy involved in this Original Application is that the applicant's father, namely Late Mohammad Ramzan Parray (Ex-Assistant Lineman [ALM], Jal Shakti Department), died in harness, where-after, the applicant submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules, 1994 notified vide SRO 43 of 1994. The applicant claims to have completed all requisite and necessary formalities prescribed by the respondents and, accordingly, his case for appointment on compassionate ground was processed and forwarded to the General Administration Department for grant of compassionate appointment in terms of SRO 43 of 1994.

It is further stated that the, respondent No. 1, vide Form No. 88575 dated 20.11.2023, received the verification from the Special Director General, CID, J&K, after receiving the requisite pre-appointment verification of character and antecedents of the applicant and accorded sanction for the temporary appointment of the applicant in the pay level SL-1 (14800-47100) as Class-IV/MTS (Roller Attendant-II), Divisional Cadre, Kashmir in the Public Works (R&B) Department, by relaxing the qualification bar in terms of Rule 7 of SRO 43 of 1994, vide Government Order No. 65-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 08.01.2024.

The applicants, however, asserts that, the Govt. Order dated 08.01.2024, whereby his appointment had been sanctioned, was never communicated him. According to him, he continued to await appointment orders in the Jal Shakti Department in District Baramulla and the General Administration Department has accorded sanction for appointment of the applicant as Class-IV/MTS (Roller Attendant-II) in Public Works (R&B) Department, J&K and directed the appointee to report to the Administrative Secretary/Public Works (R&B) Department, J&K within a period of 21 days from the date of issuance of the appointment order. It is stated that said order also contained a stipulation that in case the appointee fails to join, he would forego his right to appointment and his appointment would be deemed to have been cancelled ab-initio without any further notice.

The applicant categorically asserted that it was after a lapse of about six months that he came to know about the issuance of the appointment order in his favour on compassionate grounds. Upon gaining such knowledge, he approached respondent No. 1 as well as the respondent No. 3 and sought permission to submit his joining report in terms of Government Order No. 65-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 08.01.2024. The applicant was, thereupon, directed to fulfil certain requirements as mentioned in the said appointment order. It is stated that he completed all the requisite and necessary formalities strictly in accordance with Government Order dated 08.01.2024, but he was not permitted to join his services as Class-IV/MTS by the respondent. No. 3 on the ground that the he had failed to join his duties within a period of 21 days from the date of issuance of the appointment order and that his appointment has been cancelled ab initio without any further notice.

The applicant further pleaded that, he was waiting for the issuance of the appointment order in the Jal Shakti Department, and the General Administration Department (respondent No. 1) issued the appointment orders on compassionate basis in favour of the applicant in the Public Works (R&B) Department, J&K without informing the officers of the Jal Shakti Department, wherefrom the applicant had moved his application for appointment on compassionate basis. The respondent No. 3, i.e., Administrative Secretary, Public Works (R&B) Department, J&K, where the applicant was supposed to join within a period of 21 days from the date of issuance of the order by the General Administration Department, did not inform the applicant and no notice was either issued in the Government Gazette or published in the newspapers informing the applicant to join within 21 days, nor did the respondents bother to serve the said appointment order upon the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was pursuing his compassionate appointment case and completed all the requisite formalities, but because of the lapse on the part of the respondents, the applicant could not reap the benefits of the compassionate appointment, and the applicant and his family members are suffering penury and are on the verge of starvation. It is stated that the omissions and commissions on the part of the respondents have subjected the applicant to serious hardships, and non-communication of the appointment order to the applicant within the time and deemed cancellation is against principles of natural justice and have infringed valuable rights of the applicant and the action of the respondents is in violation of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this O.A.

Through the medium of the instant petition the applicant seeks for the following reliefs-

Learned counsel for the applicant argued the matter at length and submitted that the applicant would be satisfied if the present O.A. is treated as a representation and the respondents are directed to consider and decide the same within a stipulated time frame, in light of the averments made therein, along with the documents annexed and the law applicable in the instant case.

Learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Rais ud din Ganaie, DAG, submits that, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the respondents have no objection if the present O.A. is treated as a representation and is disposed of in terms of the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present O.A. may be disposed of at this stage by treating the same as a representation.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to respondents to treat this O.A. as representation and to consider and decide the assertion made therein, in particular the applicant’s request for permitting him to join pursuant to the order of appointment dated 08.01.2024 already issued in his favour, subject to applicable rules’ regulations and other condition and the law holding the field. Further there is no other impediment. The respondents shall also take into consideration the documents annexed with the O.A. while according such consideration.

The respondents shall afford him an effective opportunity of hearing and associate him in the process of consideration. The authority shall, in particular, examine the applicant’s contention that the order of appointment dated 08.01.2024, was never communicated to him, and that, on acquiring knowledge thereof, he appeared before the respondents.

Further, the matter shall be consider sympathetically & on humanitarian & equitable grounds, particularly keeping in view the facts that the respondents had already taken a decision to extend the benefit of compassionate appointment in his favour.

The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by passing a comprehensive reasoned, speaking, and detailed order.

It is clarified that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims or contentions raised by either side. All questions of fact and law are left open to be considered by the competent authority, in accordance with law.

Accordingly, O.A. No. 994/2026 is disposed of along with the connected M.As., if any, parties are to bear their own costs.

Consign the file to the Record Room, after due compliance.